Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hermosa Mine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents tell Santa Cruz supervisors benefits agreement defers protections tied to Hermosa Mine
Summary
Local residents and experts told the Board of Supervisors that the Early Actions Community Investment Agreement with South 32 funds community projects but contains no enforceable groundwater, air or independent-monitoring protections and urged supervisors to demand binding safeguards now.
Public commenters at the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors meeting on March 18 pressed the board to insist on enforceable environmental safeguards and independent oversight tied to the Hermosa Mine and the county’s early‑actions community investment agreement with South 32.
Multiple speakers said the early‑actions agreement focuses on community benefits while deferring protections. "This agreement is presented as a step toward community protection, but it's not a protections agreement," Jay Thompson, a Rio Rico resident, told the board, urging supervisors to require independent monitoring, transparent reporting and enforceable consequences rather than delaying protections to a later community benefits/protections agreement.
Environmental speakers highlighted scientific and regulatory concerns. Chris Werkoven, who spoke about the recently released Hermosa Mine Plan of Operations EIS, said federal agencies had intervened on permit details and warned of metal mobilization risks. "The EPA threw ADEQ under the bus," he said, citing corrected air‑permit numbers and past exceedances for antimony and selenium in surface and groundwater.
Other residents described anticipated harms they said are not addressed in the early actions. "The protections we need, independent monitoring, binding conditions, real oversight, are not in this agreement," said Darla Seelander of Lake Patagonia. Ernie Edwards similarly warned of a "dewatering cone of depression" that could alter groundwater levels across the Patagonia basin and increase heavy truck traffic and safety risks.
County staff responded to one procedural concern raised in public comment about project approvals. A staff update emphasized that projects under the early actions exhibit will be approved by all signatories — the county, the town of Patagonia, the city of Nogales and South 32 — and described the agreement as consensus‑based. That clarification addressed assertions that South 32 alone would approve projects.
The board did not take a substantive vote to change the early actions agreement during the meeting. Commenters urged supervisors to make enforceable protections a condition of accepting community investments and to press for independent, federally supported oversight before mine operations proceed further.
