Moves and firewalls? Dan, you and JK are speaking some kind of journalistic lingo that is hard to decipher. Here is what I am saying: The Mercado is as diverse a destination demographically as any retail center I know of in Tucson. Our neighborhood worked to achieve a vision of small local businesses that provide neighborhood oriented retail including a genuine farmers' market. The Mercado is not just some "expensive firewall" it is a neighborhood focal point for celebrations as personal as birthdays and ethnic as the Dia de San Juan. It is as close to what hundreds of neighbors spent years discussing and petitioning for as I can imagine possible. It has high end and it has economical just like our neighborhood. Nattering naybobs like you have been threatening the G word ever since Rio Nuevo was passed by the voters in 1999. But we just want an empanda to go with our cup of coffee in the morning and a raspado to cool off on a hot summer night. And we are grateful that minority and women owned and local businesses are providing this to us at the Mercado. We want to walk and ride our bikes to support local farmers at the Food Bank's market at the Mercado. We want to celebrate our diversity and culture as the birthplace of Tucson at festivals at the Mercado. If you can't understand that I don't know what to tell you.
@ BURNIE MAK I stand corrected. Upon review of my comment, I withdraw the "watch yourself" and apologize to Jacqueline Kuder for a statement that was better off not being said.
I do stand by the rest of my comment and I will continue to take exception to the damage done to small local businesses by reporters, like Jacqueline Kuder, who make blanket statements without looking into the actual situation.
Go take a look for yourself Jaqui, meet some of the business owners and employees at La Estrella Bakery, Sonoran Sno Cones and Dolce Pastello. Or ask the Food Bank about their Thursday Farmers' Market and the diversity of demographic it serves and then if you feel you can make that blanket statement again perhaps I'll stand corrected twice.
Thanks for your review of a westside eatery. The taco shop next door to the pizza place is the best in town especially the birria de cabrito on Sundays. However, your snide comment that "the expensive Mercado San Agustin plaza that the city decided would be the gentrification firework for the neighborhood" is not only incorrect, it's offensive. There are minority and women owned small businesses offering value for money at the Mercado such as La Estrella Bakery, Sonoran Sno Cones and Dolce Pastello. Not to mention the Food Bank's Farmers' Market on Thursday which takes WIC and EBT (food stamps), etc. The Menlo Park neighborhood fought to have local businesses located in our new commercial spaces and we are proud to have the Mercado San Augustine as our neighbor. It has become the location of and sponsor for local events such as the Dia de San Juan and the All Souls Procession. Watch yourself on the Westside chica we don't take kindly to uninformed slanderous stupidity.
No. Danehy didn't show up. He had a date with Ann Coulter. Neither heard a word the other said. But both felt that their views were the most important.
Hey Chemtrailers. It's not like we need a theory to suspect that unregulated chemicals are poisoning us. Duh!
A new report by EDF, Toxics Across America [http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/tox…], tallies billions of pounds of chemicals in the American marketplace that are known or strongly suspected to cause increasingly common disorders, including certain cancers, developmental disabilities, and infertility.
Our new report looks at 120 chemicals that have been identified by multiple federal, state and international officials as known or suspected health hazards. Using the latest, albeit limited, data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, we identify which of these chemicals are in commerce in the U.S.; in what amounts they are being made; which companies are producing or importing them; where they are being produced or imported; and how they are being used.
An interactive online map accompanying the report lets the user access the report's data and search by chemical, by company, by state, and by location.
Among the report's key findings:
At least 81 of the chemicals on the list are produced or imported to the US annually in amounts of one million pounds or more.
At least 14 exceed one billion pounds produced or imported annually, including carcinogens such as formaldehyde and benzene, and the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA).
More than 90 chemicals on the list are found in consumer and commercial products. At least eight are used in children's products.
Most Americans assume that somebody is regulating these chemicals to make sure we're safe. In fact, thanks to gaping loopholes in federal law, officials are virtually powerless to limit even chemicals — such as those featured in our report — we know or have good reason to suspect are dangerous. Because none of us has the power to avoid them on our own, we need stronger safeguards that protect us from the biggest risks and give companies that use these chemicals a reason to look for better alternatives.
Recent Comments
I do stand by the rest of my comment and I will continue to take exception to the damage done to small local businesses by reporters, like Jacqueline Kuder, who make blanket statements without looking into the actual situation.
Go take a look for yourself Jaqui, meet some of the business owners and employees at La Estrella Bakery, Sonoran Sno Cones and Dolce Pastello. Or ask the Food Bank about their Thursday Farmers' Market and the diversity of demographic it serves and then if you feel you can make that blanket statement again perhaps I'll stand corrected twice.
The "former colleague" that takes anonymous potshots at Aguirre apparently cannot speak for themselves but must hide in the shadows.
It's a cheapshot, Dan Gibson and James Hudson, to publish an anonymous statement that intends to defame someone. Chickenshits all of you!
Sorry gotta go catch the CLiTT.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/ann-…
A new report by EDF, Toxics Across America [http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/tox…], tallies billions of pounds of chemicals in the American marketplace that are known or strongly suspected to cause increasingly common disorders, including certain cancers, developmental disabilities, and infertility.
Our new report looks at 120 chemicals that have been identified by multiple federal, state and international officials as known or suspected health hazards. Using the latest, albeit limited, data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, we identify which of these chemicals are in commerce in the U.S.; in what amounts they are being made; which companies are producing or importing them; where they are being produced or imported; and how they are being used.
An interactive online map accompanying the report lets the user access the report's data and search by chemical, by company, by state, and by location.
Among the report's key findings:
At least 81 of the chemicals on the list are produced or imported to the US annually in amounts of one million pounds or more.
At least 14 exceed one billion pounds produced or imported annually, including carcinogens such as formaldehyde and benzene, and the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA).
More than 90 chemicals on the list are found in consumer and commercial products. At least eight are used in children's products.
Most Americans assume that somebody is regulating these chemicals to make sure we're safe. In fact, thanks to gaping loopholes in federal law, officials are virtually powerless to limit even chemicals — such as those featured in our report — we know or have good reason to suspect are dangerous. Because none of us has the power to avoid them on our own, we need stronger safeguards that protect us from the biggest risks and give companies that use these chemicals a reason to look for better alternatives.