Newman Ridge Referendum?

Political speech in the United States is wide open as it should be and while I cannot render a legal judgment, I believe that freedom hinges on responsibility. So when I read the No Newman Ridge quarry petition on Moveon.org I questioned how much imaginative argument we can tolerate and strive to be civil at the same time. Every one of their negative contentions have been completely refuted by extremely knowledgeable testimony at the Board of Supervisors, the Ione City Council and in the local media.  The project has been subject to a long and thorough EIR process which included major project revisions and EIR litigation. Since the project opponents have been defeated at every turn, they are now intending a ballot measure. I wonder how many people they can dupe with their distortions as their online petition did.

“Save the ranchers and farmers water” barked the ballot measure signature gatherer in front of a local market recently. The Newman Ridge EIR devotes 30 pages to water issues which have been approved twice by all the required bodies and survived the court’s intensive review. However, if they had any real grounds for an inadequate assessment of water issues another lawsuit would seem the most logical and productive strategy.  But their chosen course appears to be fear mongering backed by misrepresentation. “Untouched” and “pristine” still describe Newman Ridge on their posted petition when it’s a 150 year old mining area active until just a few decades ago. They claim that the EIR “cannot be legally approved” because it “did not investigate alternatives”. Minerals are where you find them. The only alternative is no project. But this world class deposit of andesite will make stronger roadbeds that save tax payer money along with the benefit of less disruptive road work.

The petition still refers to the quarry with the more excitable term of strip mine. This state of mind continues with “The area is already served well by three local quarries…running under capacity, so there is no business justification.”  What do we call governments that allocate markets? Doesn’t the free enterprise system work by creating a surplus that brings the price down? Has someone magically repealed the law of supply and demand? They further contend that this project “…will annihilate any chance this area has of attracting new clean business.” Most business people gravitate toward areas of economic activity and avoid those with a hostile reception.

They again exaggerate the project’s truck traffic, including ignoring prior and safe peaks of truck traffic.  In the existing plans and noted in the EIR is the Ione Bypass. The bypass will be a benefit for all, project or no project. Is it more likely to be built in a period of increasing tax revenue or in a stagnant economy?  But they somehow believe that a “Nature Park” instead will foster economic growth in a county already one third national forest. This notion seems as well founded as their contention that the project “will cause nearby home and ranch values to collapse.” By what logic is someone selling nature trail booklets going to be able to better afford a home that a heavy equipment operator?  

The product that doesn’t move by truck will move by rail. This provides the possibility of making our remaining railroad sustainable with a conceivable extension to the rest of the Newman Ridge project. Maintaining our railroad, which eliminates potential future diesel truck traffic along with stronger roadbeds, are both environmental pluses for the project. But the project opponents see only “massive environmental destruction”. The only massive destruction apparent is that of integrity.

Another significant issue is who is paying the opponents signature gatherers and attorneys? Since they are organized as a LLC (limited liability corporation) their information is not as easily accessible as that of a nonprofit such as the Foothill Conservancy.  If they are spending their own money that is their right. And if they are wealthy enough to finance this campaign it smells like an instance of the rich keeping the poor poor for whatever benefit they may derive.

Copyright 2015, Mark L. Bennett