Anti-Demolition Demonstration Set for Wednesday at Noon

Click on image to enlarge.

Don't Blow Your Stack, Part 3

Roberto Puga, ASARCO Trustee, will hold a public meeting on February 26, 2013 from 6 to 7 p.m. in the Main Auditorium of the El Paso Downtown Library, 501 N. Oregon Street. (Map and directions) Visit the Trustee's web site for more information.

On Monday, City Council voted 5 to 3 to suspend attorney-client privilege and release the findings of a ruling about the Trustee's authority to donate the stack to the City of El Paso or a non-profit. 

The principle quesiton was: "Does the Trustee have the authority to convey at no cost, i.e., donate, the stack to another owner, e.g., the City or a non-profit organization formed for the purpose of preserving the stack?"

The answer: Yes, but.  "The Trust does not appear to prohibit donation of the stack, if the donation will advance the objectives of the Trust. However, the proposed donation would be evaluated in light of other competing interests of the Trust, and requires approval of TCEQ and EPA."

Translation: TCEQ will never approve doing anything with the stack but demolishing it. Therefore, in early April, Puga will carry out the destruction of the stack barring any unforeseen events.

Ruling on ASARCO Trustee's Ability to Donate Land to City under the Trust by jimhtolbert434

Save the Stacks issued this memo of Puga misinformation:

"From the outset Mr. Puga was willing to consider leaving the stacks standing--we now know that his intention all along was to demolish, and he never gave us a second thought.

If we proved they were stable and we could provide an owner with means to guarantee any liability, then he would preserve them--we proved they were stable, and the city offered to accept ownership, yet he backed out of his promise.

He claimed from the outset that he had $52M to clean up the El Paso site--that figure included clean-up of the Amarillo site, leaving the funds available for El Paso much less.

Cost to preserve and maintain the stacks over 50 years will exceed $14 million--most of this is a guess at the insurance costs for "liability"; the rest are guesses at the repair, preservation and maintenance.  Our engineering report shows the actual costs are estimated at $3.9 million, including $950,000 in hazards remediation that Puga must spend regardless.

His contention that the stacks are unstable is based on absolutely no engineering analysis; the actual engineering analysis based on physical inspection show the main stack structurally sound and meets all required standards.  It has stood the test of time of almost 50 years with no structural flaws.  Minor repairs to the scaffolding, upper rim and painting are the only issues found by the engineers.

"Demolition and burial of the stacks is the best environmental solution given their hazardous condition."  Actually, demolition and burial will likely create more problems environmentally than simply leaving them where they are.   The burial pit itself is part of the Parker Brothers arroyo, a major geological part of the site where Mother Nature has determined that the Franklin Mountain water runoff has and will flow for centuries.  The proposed "encapsulation" with a membrane lining and "monolayer" cap will likely erode with time (anywhere from 10  to 50 years) depending on the actual physical conditions of the materials, amount of overburden, the amount of ground water flow, etc.  No independent third party has analyzed the technical risk/viability of the proposed encapsulation.  Any leakage will have a direct passage to the Rio Grande.  It's not a matter of if, just when.  Environmentally, it would be better to keep the stacks above ground where the inner linings could be easily sealed and monitored, indefinitely.

He claims the cost of demolition is a million bucks--our engineering team thinks it is much higher than that.

"He has no authority to preserve or spend money to maintain the stacks." Legal analysis of the trust agreement under which he acts gives him broad authority to do pretty much anything he wants to with the stacks and/or the property, including spending some of the money he has for their preservation and maintenance.  He has already said he would spend funds for "cultural' and "historical" preservation of the plant offices and the power house.

"He has no authority to simply deed the stacks or related property to El Paso or any other entity."  Legal analysis again says he has wide latitude in how he disposes of the property, including giving it away to the city or other entity.

"He must realize the greatest profit from sale of the property, thereby limiting how he disposes of the property."  The answer is the same as above on legal authority; he can 'sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of all or part of such properties, if possible' and and may 'consider criteria other than sales price' in disposal of the property.  Profit does not enter into the equation.

"The city must pay him $10 million for the property associated with the stacks, as a 'fair assessed value' of the land." This contention was literally pulled out of thin air.  There is no analysis of the 'fair assessed value' of this land, in part because of the ongoing liability and related costs.  Actual analysis of the property values taking into account the liability and other issues, actually show the property as a net, negative value."

"The presence of the stacks reduces the value of the property." Again there is no analysis to back up this statement.  The stacks in fact, properly preserved and maintained will like be an attraction to anyone looking to build appropriate land use value to this part of the property.  Projects in Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Monterrey, Mexico are examples of how communities have transformed similar industrial sites into economic and cultural centers for those communities.

Mr. Puga has claimed the east side (by UTEP) will be livable--the TCEQ told the UT Administration that there is no chance that the east side will be remediated sufficiently for housing.

He misrepresented the one inquiry he was able to provide information about – the email that showed an interested buyer wanted to do military training -- a questionable use for many reasons. While some of those reasons are subject of a different debate, for our purposes 1) there’s almost no taxable value associated with that use, so that raises further questions about his projects and 2) with regard to the stacks, their objection was first and foremost that the presence of the stacks implied public access, with the issue of liability a secondary concern but not a deal-killer."

In addition Mr. Puga has not allowed independent verification of the contaminants on the site. Thus there is no confirmation of his assertion that more toxic materials will not be "encapsulated".

Nevertheless, many environmentally-concerned and conscientious citizens maintain that the safest solution is to bring the stacks down and that it is high time to do so since Mr. Puga gave efforts to save the stacks time to come up with funding. In a letter to Senator Rodriguez dated January 27, 2013 (pre-dating the decision by Council to release the ruling) environmental activist, Peggy McNiel,  wrote:

"I was astounded and dismayed that you are supporting taxpayer funds being allocated to preserve the Asarco smokestacks.

This idea has already been presented to our city council and voted down.  Taxpayers in the city of El Paso do not support funding the preservation of the Asarco smokestacks.  Please do not take this outside the purview of the taxpaying voters who will have to pay for this if you succeed.

What is surprising is that you are not fighting for additional funds to further clean-up the site--including demolition of the stacks--to make it more conducive to all types of development not just commercial---a worthy endeavor for an environmentally conscious individual.

Some facts you may not be aware of:

1)Remediation of the site has always included demolition of the smokestacks because of their danger to the public. To quote from the TCEQ's engineer who authored the remediation plan. "The lack of routine maintenance will accelerate deterioration of the buildings and structures.  The deterioration of the structures will pose a hazard to any unauthorized persons and, as is the case with the smokestacks and the bridge over I-10, will pose a direct hazard to the public."

This was written in 2009.  It is 4 years later.  Do you really want to champion funding of a "direct hazard to the public".?

2) The Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club regards the smokestacks as "toxic waste" in their public comments to the Assistant Attorney General, Environmental and Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington D.C. 

Their public comments were written by one of their PHDs.

3)  The Asarco stacks in both Tacoma, Wash. and Omaha, Nebraska were both demolished as part of their remediation plans for their sites.  I talked to the on site manager for Citizens for a healthy bay, Ms. Leslie Rose, in Tacoma, Wash. regarding their stack demolition.  She practically jumped out of the phone to say, "Controlled demolition is safer than leaving the stacks up and not properly maintaining them."  She asks why would you want to leave the stacks as a liability for future generations.  The Tacoma stacks were demolished according to their EPA directed remediation plan.  She went on to say that if the stacks remain, someone is always responsible for costly maintenance.  An uncontrolled, unplanned failure of the stacks could be catastrophic and end up killing people.  Maybe, not now, but at some point, the stacks will have to be demolished. 

The Asarco trustee has hired independent experts who put the cost to stabilize the 826 ft stack at $6 million up front and $100,000 to $150,000 per year ad infinitum.  Later Mr. Puga said further up front wind stabilization would be required at an additional cost of at least $4 million.  This is to adequately preserve the stacks.

The Save the Stacks group immediately rejected these costs of safety even before they had conducted a study.  At the City Council meeting, their firm estimated the costs at $4 million over 50 years compared to the trustee's study that the cost would be $14 million plus the wind retrofitting of $4 million plus over 50 years.  Puga has rejected their proposal as not adequate.  Puga is the man I trust backed by the TCEQ and the EPA not some locals without the proper training and experience to judge which study is valid.  The Save the Stacks hired firm admitted in the council meeting that they did not consider the threat of wind to toppling the stacks.  Yet the Save the Stacks group continues to say it will only require $4 million.

4) Ms. Rose of Tacoma also offered that if the stacks had remained, no one would buy the property for development.  This is the same objection reported by Puga in his initial attempt to find interested buyers.

El Paso needs taxpaying entities.  We don't need a blighted site.

5)  There is nothing remarkable about these stacks other than the extent of their pollution and cost of preservation.  There are 31 taller stacks in the U.S.  The tallest one is 1217 ft. in Homer, Pa. Of the 31, 21 stacks are 1000 ft. or taller.  The Asarco stacks were not designed by Trost.  They were built in 1966 in a standard manufacturing process. 

6)  In a poll conducted by an independent research firm for the El Paso, Times, 80% of the polled were against stack preservation if the taxpayer would be required to fund it.  The Save the Stacks group keeps referring to a poll where 70% are for stack preservation. They have never referenced the research firm who conducted the poll, the sample size and the reliability factor.

7)  Mr. Puga has given the public 2 years and extended deadlines twice to provide any group every opportunity to come up with the funding to safely preserve the stacks.  The current group has not been able to come up with their own funding. So they embarked upon a scheme to offload the liability and cost to adequately and safely preserve the stacks onto the taxpayer.  This was voted down in the El Paso City Council by a majority.  Now this group is going to you Senator to extract funds from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. for preservation of polluted stacks.  At a time when our state parks are underfunded, why would anyone wish to cut additional funds from our mountains, beaches and parks to fund these polluted stacks?  Help me.

I urge you to allow the original remediation plan to go forward and support the trustee, Mr. Puga, the TCEQ and the EPA to clean up the polluted site and demolish the polluted, dangerous smokestacks in the interests of the environment and the health and safety of the citizenry.

These are my own opinions most of which are shared by a group of us who are against stacks preservation. We are now about 60 and counting. All of us do not want our taxes--local, state or federal allocated to preserving the polluted smokestacks.

If you wish to meet with me and discuss this further, I would be happy to go over the extensive documents and references further.

Thank you for your service,

Peggy McNiel"

Funding is the bottom line.  City Council won't provide any funds for structural "fixes", maintenance nor insurance.  It's not just TCEQ. Other large entities and powerful forces are involved. I continue to be skeptical about the safety of bringing down the stacks and then encapsulating them in the Parker Brothers Arroyo - an arroyo lined with pretty friable rock. Nevertheless, unless something unforeseeable happens in the next six weeks, it appears that I will take Peggy up on her offer to sip Brandy Alexanders and watch the demolition of these historic monuments.  Once gone, they will always be gone.  Jackson Polk of El Paso Gold has already prepared to document the final demise.

Don't Blow Your Stack, Part 1

Where do things stand now regarding the Asarco stacks or stack? Quick review: Robert Ardovino wrote an excellent editorial published here on November 26, 2012 prior to City Council issuing its opinion. One of my favorite  quotes from the editorial was from the trustee, Roberto Puga, himself. He said: "The stacks are, I think, an important cultural icon in El Paso." Keep that quote in mind as you read further.

Mr. Ardovino's argument to save the stack(s) was based on a very trustworthy engineering report that the stacks are "strong, straight and solid".

On November 27, 2012, City Council voted to save the stacks as long as they did not have to spend any money. It has been contended since then that Puga has the authority to give the stacks and land to the City rather than holding the City hostage for millions of dollars if it wants to save the stacks.

So here is what has happened post 11/27/12 bringing you up to now:  

Not long after the City Council vote, prominent El Paso leaders met in Mayor Cook's office and placed a call to Mr. Puga and his attorneys.  Present along with Save the Stack leaders Robert Ardovino and Jeffrey Wright and journalist, Sito Negron, were Mayor John Cook, Rep. Steve Ortega, U.S. Rep.-elect Beto O'Rourke and State Senator Jose Rodriguez. They urged Mr. Puga to donate the land to the City and contended that Puga has the discretion to do so. Puga contended that he must sell everything and he continued to claim that no one will buy the land with the stacks standing.

Senator Rodriguez has asked for an opinion from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott whether Puga has the discretion to donate the land.  Keep in mind that the Senator is very environmentally friendly. His Environmental Advisory Committee is wall to wall environmentalists/conservationists.  Dr. Richard Teschner is the chairman. (Disclaimer: I recently was awarded a certificate for serving on this Committee.)

Puga's company, Project Navigator Ltd, benefits more when Puga gets more money. To turn the site over to the City now would curtail how much more Project Navigator makes and how much more Roberto Puga himself makes. As one Save the Stack person told me: "There was no chance in hell that Puga was ever going to keep the stacks up." 

It is rumored that one possible land buyer would play war games on the site - real war games not elaborate paint ball. Imagine the consequences of a volley falling on UTEP or . . . Mexico!  The stacks no longer belch, they are strong, straight and solid so why, Ardovino wonders, risk bringing them down during El Paso's windiest season using an untested $650,000 misting system?

Preservatonists for the most part argue that the stacks (or stack - most concede now that it may be only possible to save the larger of the two) are historic landmarks and monuments and treated properly would make valuable attractions. It is pretty much common sense that, such a prominent landmark, could be commercially beneficial in spite of what Mr. Puga proclaims.

On the other hand, environmentalists, seem to be split into two camps: those who believe that it is best to tear them down and, if really, truly possible, contain the contaminants permanently. The risk of an environmental catastrophe just doesn't make sense. The other camp says that the risk to the environment is much greater if the stacks are brought down. Among those who want to keep these strong, straight and solid structures standing are those who also see the positive in their becoming landmarks. However, some who want to keep them standing, do so because the contamination would be too great to bring them down and, in fact, the contamination of the land now is too great to contemplate ever remediating and developing the land.

In my next post, I'll discuss the arguments for and against keeping them standing.

For the Sake of the Environment - Save the Stacks

Video courtesy of Capstone Productions

By now all of you have probably heard that City Council wants to preserve the stacks but not use any tax money or City indebtedness to do so. Read the Chris Roberts report. 

A few thoughts:

Tuesday revealed that Puga is not a straight-shooter. He claims that there are buyers for the land if there are no stacks. Of course, some investors may say that they are interested but that doesn't mean a contract. It's all speculation at this time.  In point of fact it will take several years to sell the land and that is plenty of time to work out financing which saves the stacks or do whatever. 

Puga claimed that the entire land had to be sold together. As he was questioned on Tuesday, that claim was modified. The point of the matter is that he has discretion to dispose of the property however he as Trustee sees fit.

I keep hearing that the TCEQ really wants to bring the stacks down. Why? Again, I smell a cover-up - the need for a perfect crime.

Many of my readers were adamant that the stacks be taken down either because they are an eyesore or from a motivation of getting rid of the contaminants. Although I share their motivation - all of us who love the environment are so motivated - I fear that bringing the stacks down won't save us and future generations from nasty contaminants, it will actually make it more likely that those contaminants will compromise the ground water and eventually make their way into the Americas Canal and the Rio Grande. 

There are some environmentalists (and I'm talking about trained biologists and geologists) who don't even want anyone walking over this land ever again. They won't agree with my suggestion that the stacks will be good for marketing potential commercial property and creating tourism. There's nasty stuff in those stacks. It has already been proven and admitted that chemicals used in warfare and radioactive wastes were burned there. HKN and Save the Stacks have demonstrated that the stacks are strong, straight and solid. Keep the poisons locked away rather than bringing them to the ground where, in time, they will contaminate our water supply.

Again the motive behind my reasoning is a love for the environment and the safety of humans and other living things. Unlike similar stacks that have been brought down around the country, the construction of the ASARCO stacks are totally different. Demolish and a malevolent jinn is out of the bottle. Our duty as stewards of the environment is to keep the beast locked up.

What is going to happen. The Byrd motion which passed when the Mayor joined 4 Council members to express the City's desire to keep the stacks will have some weight. What Puga needs to understand is that there are citizens who can find solutions and it will be good to work together. Now that we are talking about this issue in earnest, he may discover that many will realize that it will be much better environmentally to keep the strong, straight and solid stacks.

For the sake of our lives and health and the well-being of our environment I'm not going to leave this issue alone.

Save the Stacks!

There are several items of special interest on tomorrow’s City Council agenda. Let’s take them one by one.

Item 20D on the agenda could simply be called the Save the Stacks resolution. There are back-up documents including the resolution, a response from the Trustee, Robert Puga, a map, and a “review” of the HKN study which disputes the HKN findings that the stacks are “strong, straight and solid.” However, the HKN document itself is not provided with back-ups.  You can read the HKN report and executive summary on elpasonaturally.  I doubt seriously whether City Council members will read it by tomorrow as it is not part of the agenda back-up materials unless, of course, they read elpasonaturally.

Both the El Paso Inc. and the El Paso Times have done stories about the resolution and the City’s consideration of purchasing the stacks in order to save them. Those stories can be found here and here.  The obstacle seems to be Trustee Robert Puga’s insistence that the stacks be torn down come hell or high water. When citizens first were asked about the stacks, a majority voiced a desire to save them. Then it was announced that saving them would mean a $14Million price tag plus ongoing maintenance, liability, yada, yada, yada. The thrust of the HKN report is that saving the stacks will not mean a $14Million fix but only a $4Million fix. $10Million is the amount that Mr. Puga insists the City pay for the entire site since he hopes to prevent the City from buying just the stacks and the area around the stacks for a monument. It is this $10Million price tag that Puga now threatens the City Council with in an effort to carry out the plan to demolish the chimneys.  Some of the stacks supporters on the Council are willing to save the stacks but not buy the entire land. Frankly, I don’t know why City Attorneys can’t compel Puga to sell just the area with the stacks if he is going to continue to change the rules of the game.

The stacks are safe. They are historically significant. They are and can be objects of art. And they can be much more.

Imagine a commercial area with shops and restaurants. Call it “The Stacks”. Beckoning El Pasoans and eager tourists are two very tall chimneys artistically repainted. These chimneys become beacons of economic opportunity and development for the City of El Paso. They attract not just shoppers but millions of dollars of tax revenue for the City. What better marketing can you have then attractively decorated chimneys? Puga is wrong. Any developer or investor with any amount of imagination can see the value of keeping those stacks.  Historic smokestacks in Baltimore, San Antonio and Cleveland “have been converted into attractions that have generated revenue for their owners,” according to Robert Ardovino of Save the Stacks.

What happens if Puga and company drop the stacks? Two things: First, even though the stacks would be collapsed into a ditches created for them and dropped while huge water sprayers attempt to keep down most (but not all) of the dust, there is still the possibility of contamination now contained within the strong, solid and straight walls of the chimneys. Second, as elpasonaturally previously surmised, the “evidence” of more insidious contamination will be destroyed. Some future law suit which would benefit all not just the victims will be impossible, because the evidence of insidious contamination will have been destroyed – the crime scene compromised – the evidence now locked away in the chimneys forever gone.

Bottom line – Save the Stacks.  They are monuments now and can never be used again industrially – never.  Ask your City Council member to save the stacks and to read the HKN reports:

Ann Morgan Lilly: district1@elpasotexas.gov
Susie Byrd: district2@elpasotexas.gov
Emma Acosta: district3@elpasotexas.gov
Carl Robinson: district4@elpasotexas.gov
Dr. Michael Noe: district5@elpasotexas.gov
Eddie Holguin Jr.: district6@elpasotexas.gov
Steve Ortega: district7@elpasotexas.gov
Cortney Niland: district8@elpasotexas.gov
Mayor John Cook: mayor@elpasotexas.gov

Item 18 asks Council to approve the same resolution already passed by the PSB to make the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park part of the PSB’s holdings. The plan means more water for the Bosque and millions of dollars of eco-tourist dollars for El Paso. Read the Chris Robert’s El Paso Times story.  Also read Water Prospects Brighten in this month’s Rio Bosque news.

An issue that probably won’t go away any time soon is considered in item 20E. The issue in short is this: Although the City owns the land (and it is part of the PSB inventory and part of the NE Master Plan), the mineral rights beneath a square mile of the land are owned by the General Land Office of the State of Texas. They have agreed to lease that land to Jobe to quarry. Jobe currently operates a quarry adjacent to and north of this land. The Chris Roberts story in the Times provides good summary and insight. See the Council’s back-up material on this agenda item. There is a significant archaeological site on the land which raises the concern that the Texas Historical Commission may still object. Jobe will have to remediate the land that has extensive archaeological materials – something which may take time and great expense. The lease impacts the NE Master Plan. Although asked how much revenue the City may lose, Ed Archuleta, so far has not responded. Another keen observer calculates that the 900 acres of land lost at $35Thousand an acre will be a loss of $31.5Million in  income. If $300Thousand can be recouped each year from royalties, it will take 100 years to make up the difference. Jobe is currently doing a survey to determine how much and what part of the land will be quarried.

Items 14A and 14B are simply an update on the NW Master Plan/petition process.  “We’re finalizing the survey, Low Impact Development, and Dover Kohl regulating plan,” Carlos Gallinar told me.  “The PSB is still finalizing the deal with Texas Parks and Wildlife but still needs an official survey,” he said.  Gallinar will ask Council for one more postponement and will get its final report to council in early 2013.

Finally, an estimated 200 people packed the Mecca Lounge at Ardovino’s Desert Crossing yesterday to celebrate and pay tribute to the life of Kevin Von Finger. See some pictures. Be sure you read the best online tribute to Kevin written by Kevin Bixby of the Southwest Environmental Center.

Strong, Straight and Solid - the Engineering Reports

An engineering study by HKN of El Paso has concluded in the words of Robert Ardovino that the ASARCO stacks are "strong, straight and solid." As historic icons, architectural wonders and potential canvasses for future El Paso Southwest art, the stacks could become beacons of economic opportunity and development in El Paso.

One thing for sure: they can never be used again to burn insidious or any other kind of waste. They are monuments now and not industrial machines.

Here are the HKN reports not included in the back-up material for City Council members as they consider tomorrow a resolution to save the stacks

Structural Analysis of ASARCO Stacks HKN ASARCO Stack Report Engineering Report Executive Summary about ASARCO Smoke Stacks

Strong, Straight and Solid - So Save the Stacks!

People often ask how I became a proponent of stack preservation.

My history with these stacks started at a young age, with orange skies on the school playground and the taste of sulfur in my mouth.  Many of my friends from this time are no longer here to share their unfortunate stories of how ASARCO affected them.  Inexplicable illness and mortality runs common through the lives of both former smelter workers and the people it affected.  For this reason, I joined a group that helped close ASARCO down – a historic day.

The stack is not just part of my history, but El Paso’s history. The stack represents thousands of families who bettered their lives through hard work, realizing the American dream here on our border. The smelter’s contributions led to the growth and development of our community, including support for the establishment of the Texas State School of Mines and Metallurgy, later Texas Western College, and now UTEP.

"The stacks are, I think, an important cultural icon in El Paso" - Robert Puga, ASARCO Site Custodial Trustee

El Pasoans recognize the importance of this history.  In June, 2010, an El Paso Times poll put 58% in favor of smokestack preservation.  Trustee Robert Puga stated that the turn-of-the-century Powerhouse would be saved during remediation of the site. Mr. Puga also said, “The stacks are, I think, an important cultural icon in El Paso.” 

"The stack is strong, straight and solid."

Then Mr. Puga wrongly asserted that stack preservation would cost $14 million.  Public attitudes changed on this information - released without an actual stack inspection. Save The Stacks formed, commissioning a $50,000+ engineering analysis of the stack, confirming the stack is strong, straight and solid.  Moreover, the cost of stack maintenance over the next 50 years is now estimated at $3 million – $11 million less than asserted.  Most importantly, the citizens of El Paso – through local funding and local efforts - have met all the requirements Mr. Puga had dictated for stack preservation. 

We should look at our history, actual facts, and public opinion, and weigh all this against an outside interest – namely, the Trust led by Robert Puga – which has no background in El Paso, no interest in preserving our history, and no interest in saving our landmarks.  Even the historic Powerhouse is now slated for demolition. Why commit historic landmarks for demolition?  The Bottom Line.  The Trust thinks it will make more money by selling land free of buildings.  This is not local taxpayer money; it is money associated with ASARCO’s bankruptcy. 

"In other communities . . . historic smokestacks have been converted into attractions that generate revenue for their owners."

In other communities – such as San Antonio, Baltimore, and Cleveland - historic smokestacks have been converted into attractions that generate revenue for their owners. In El Paso, the decisions of outsiders cannot dictate our future.

In 2011, strong city leaders approved a comprehensive plan for a more vibrant El Paso - an El Paso with a vision that is Strong, Straight, and Solid. Recent elections reaffirmed its relevance.  Plan El Paso calls for “restoration and strategic repair of historic structures, which can serve as valuable tourism opportunities. Use these buildings and include new ones to create a rich cultural center for residents and visitors. Museums could potentially honor the History of Asarco and those who worked there, and the industrial heritage of The United States and Mexico.”

We have presented a concept of how this landmark is destined to be recognized as a Historic Monument, memorializing not only the former smelter workers but all the citizens of the region it has affected. 

The tallest monument in the United States is the St. Louis arch, at 630 feet.  The second is the San Jacinto Monument, at 570 feet.  Strong, Straight, and Solid, our monument stands 826 feet Tall!

"Let us keep our history, and not give up that right to one person who has no stake in our community." 

On Tuesday, please support City Council by asking them to stand up for our heritage. Let us keep our history, and not give up that right to one person who has no stake in our community.  We must stand strong, straight and solid in support of what is Our History, and demand that this Stack – our monument - remain.

by Robert Ardovino, leader of many environmental causes in El Paso and Sunland Park, and owner of Ardovino's Desert Crossing with his sister, Marina.

Save the Stacks

Click on image to enlarge.

Here's a message from Robert Ardovino who is leading the charge to save the Asarco stacks:

Dear Colleagues,

The time has come to directly challenge the $14M number tossed out very early on in this fight for Historic Preservation. Eight months have gone by and Save the Stacks has put together a Board of Directors, formed a 501-c3 and has been working hard behind the scenes in order to keep this future monument standing.   

StS has contracted with a national chimney inspecting firm, Industrial Access to prove that the stacks are structurally sound and will stand. Early indication by three separate Firms on the ground under the stacks has left us very optimistic about the  integrity of the stacks.   At this stage we need to raise funds to pay for the $80k Inspection and the Engineering report.

To dat we have commitment for just over half of that amount.  

Time is running out, we NEED your help this week. Mr. Puga has set a demo deadline of November 2012.

please make checks payable to:

BNSL (Bi-National Sustainability Lab)

2906 Silver Ave.

El Paso, Tx 79930

STS in the memo line