Member since Mar 17, 2010


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “More Trash Talk

Proposition 207 exempts the following categories of regulation from the compensation/waiver requirement: (1) laws intended to protect the public health and safety (e.g. building codes, health and sanitation laws, transportation and traffic control, solid and hazardous waste regulations, and pollution controls); (2) law that “[l]imit or prohibit the use or division of real property commonly and historically recognized as a public nuisance under common law”; (3) regulations required under federal law; (4) regulations of adult businesses, housing for sex offenders, liquor, and other undesirable uses; (5) laws necessary to establish locations for utility facilities; (6) laws that “[d]o not directly regulate an owner’s land”; and (7) laws enacted before Proposition 207.

Posted by gears on 03/19/2010 at 11:49 AM

Re: “More Trash Talk

Hmmm. I don't remember any homeowners from any of the sub-divisions located near other landfills saying anything about land valuation. What this article did not do is post the entire study done by Brian Johnson of the Pima County Assessor's Office. This study makes a comparison of property value declination based on different sub-divisions located by Los Reales and Tangerine landfills. While taking into consideration the economic conditions related to falling land values these sub-divisions, this study showed valuation loss at differing rates. The sub-divisions that experience most of the landfill related traffic experience a larger percentage of devaluation than a comperable sub-division. What people could or could not afford when they bought their homes has nothing to do with the actual values. That is a Sub-Prime issue that garners a different argument. The value of land lies in what people will pay for it. You can appraise land at any value you like but if no one will buy it then it is worthless.

BTW, it is better to not write anything and be considered illiterate than to write something and remove all doubt.

Posted by gears on 03/18/2010 at 10:20 PM

Re: “More Trash Talk

retrorv-Didn't mean to imply you were defending the landfill. Just wanted to make sure that people knew this issue was more than just a p***ing contest between the county and the TOM. Basically there isn't much the county can do to stop the process other than press the issue on permits and make sure the developer has all of his i's dotted and t's crossed. They're pretty much limited to an advisory capacity. We're just hoping that combined, our coalition group and the county, we can put enough pressure on the developer to take the feasability out of this project.

Posted by gears on 03/18/2010 at 4:15 PM

Re: “Trash Troubles

Let's call a turkey a turkey. This issue is all about money. Herb Kai wasn't against the landfill in 1991 because of pollution issues; unless it's eye pollution. Water pollution was, and is, a secondary issue to him. He is a business man. If water pollution is the less expensive of the two issues, he'll take water pollution over loss of the opportunity to make money. When it comes to profits, Kai is no better than the executives at AIG or Bank of America. How much money can I put into my pocket before the house of cards collapses. Methinks his ethics stink.

Posted by gears on 03/18/2010 at 9:55 AM

Re: “More Trash Talk

Pima County's dispute with Marana has nothing to do with this. Not that I wish to defend anything Chuck H. does, but Pima County's involvement in this project was at the request of the neighborhood coalition against the landfill. DKL Holdings, Inc figured they'd railroad this project into existence and we'd just sit back and accept it. There are several issues at stake in this of which property values is only one of them. How's about a 400 acre, 250 foot tall landfill 2000 feet away from your back door?

Posted by gears on 03/17/2010 at 4:56 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Trash Troubles

    A private-landfill proposal in Marana has residents, politicians and lobbyists spinning
    • Mar 4, 2010
  • More Trash Talk

    A Pima County appraisal says a proposed landfill will devastate nearby property values
    • Mar 18, 2010
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2017 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation