Other articles by Tony Davis:

AZ Senate fails to act on gas-storage cavernVote pending on exemptions for underground gas storage Killing lions to save sheep faulted Natural gas threatens water, critics sayAZ wanted a jaguar collared despite 2 deaths in Sonora Ex-Gov. Castro, 93, reflects on AZ issues Audubon: Climate change is shifting bird migration Lawmakers decry US stance that it can't block Rosemont mine Bear, lion track count ends after 20-year run$900M financing sought for mine

Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Construction
West-Press
Printing Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President

Pima County staffers did nothing wrong in their handling of federal Clean Water Act regulation of county road, flood-control and sewer projects, County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry says in a new report.

The report was ordered by the Board of Supervisors after a series of internal county memos suggested staffers opposed U.S. efforts to regulate the building of county projects along rivers and washes and to declare the Santa Cruz River navigable.

Environmental groups, in particular, said the county was trying to push federal agencies into loosening controls over these projects — in direct contradiction to the county's land-saving Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan.

Huckelberry wrote in his audit report that the staff did not violate any Board of Supervisors policies. Far from trying to oppose federal regulation, the staff was seeking speedy and clear federal decisions, he said.

The staff was pushing for "simple and quick . . . determinations in order to proceed rationally and reasonably with county public works projects," he said.

The staff never discussed trying to avoid saving land or endangered species to compensate for the projects' environmental effects, he wrote.

Huckelberry also sent the board a memo from the chief civil deputy county attorney, who concluded after a detailed review that no attorneys working on this issue made policy decisions regarding the Clean Water Act.

But supervisors Chairman Richard Elías said the board's main purpose in ordering the audit was not to find out whether staffers had violated board policy, but whether they were setting policy without consulting with the supervisors.

As far as Elías is concerned, staff members did try to set policy, by writing numerous letters and memos indicating concern and at times outright opposition to federal policies.

"That was a grave error on their part," Elías said.

Environmentalist Carolyn Campbell, director of the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection, said she believed the staff broke board policy — the previously approved Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, which calls for projects to be built in such a way that protection of resources is considered "from the beginning."

At issue in this audit is how the county reacted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' response to a 2006 Supreme Court decision. It limited the Clean Water Act's authority to control development and pollution on rivers and washes. Since then, the corps has confined regulation to washes with clear links to navigable waterways.

Last May, the Corps of Engineers determined that two stretches of the Santa Cruz River totaling 54 miles in the Tucson area are navigable. The corps suspended that decision in early July for a detailed review.

The federal agency also concluded that it has authority to regulate a major Pima County road widening that crosses five washes. The project would widen La Cañada Drive from two to four lanes between Ina Road and Calle Concordia.

To Pima County Public Works Department staffers, these rules and the feds' inability to make timely decisions spelled major delays and expenses for many important projects.

To environmentalists, Elías and other board members, however, the federal actions were important to make sure that wildlife habitat isn't damaged by road building.

In his audit, Huckelberry said the county staff memos he read appear to address policy options and implications for potential county actions. "A simple evaluation of alternatives is not setting policy," Huckelberry said.

But Elías and environmentalists pointed to some of the same memos to back up their views.

The memos include two key statements from John Bernal, deputy county administrator for public works:

● Pima County government disagreed with the Corps of Engineers' initial decision that the Santa Cruz is navigable.

● Pima County government also disagreed with the corps' decision that the washes crossed by La Cañada Drive should be covered by federal regulations.

Matt Skroch, director of the environmentalist Sky Island Alliance, argued that shows the staff members weren't just asking for clear federal direction.

"The clarity existed — it just wasn't the clarity that county staff preferred," Skroch said.

On Wednesday, a U.S. House oversight committee will hold a hearing in Washington, D.C., on federal government enforcement of the Clean Water Act.

The question of whether Southern Arizona's Santa Cruz River is "navigable" is likely to be discussed.

The hearing starts at 7 a.m. Wednesday, Tucson time. It will be webcast.

Information on viewing the webcast will be on the committee Web site that morning at oversight.house.gov.