Steve K's Newsletter 04/01/19

Topics in this issue...

Be Kind

I have given Be Kind recognition to the volunteers at the Benedictine in the past. I am doing it again this week, and showing this picture as an example of the art being produced by the kids who arrive at the monastery.

There is a drawing room at the monastery where the children do their art. In case you cannot read the words, they say "Freedom is choices and happiness. Freedom is safe." The volunteers who are serving at the site 24/7 are making those kinds of expressions possible.

A while back, a woman from Jackson, Wyoming and I toured the monastery. She asked if she could pick some of the oranges to make marmalade. She did, and thanks to Wyoming Betsy for bringing a jar of the Benedictine monastery marmalade to the office last week. Also included in this recognition is Ross. He ultimately gave her the okay to be there picking the fruit.


Coming this Saturday, April 6th is the 5th annual Easter party for homeless veterans and their families. It is held each year at the American Legion Post, #7. They are now asking for donations of gently used clothing, shoes, warm weather gear, personal hygiene items and even dog food. They will host the luncheon on the 6th, and pass out all of the donated goods they collect. If you can help, please take your donated items to the Post at 330 W. Franklin St. You are invited to their event on Easter Sunday from 1pm until 3pm on April 6th.

Don’t forget the other monastery event coming this month. It is the Lend a Hand senior assistance ‘yard sale’ that’ll be taking place inside the chapel on Friday, April 26th and Saturday, April 27th. All of the proceeds go to helping seniors age-in-place in their homes. Please take your donated items to any of these locations:

  • Wallace Kinkade - 3646 N. Prince Village Pl., 323-2142
  • Glenn Perkins - 817 E. Glenn St., 505-8982
  • Jane Hoffmann - 1545 E. Water, 323-9299
  • Nancy Ruhl - 4309 N. Radin, 954-3560

You should call ahead of time to make sure they are home before loading up and making the trip. Come to the event later this month. It is a wonderful cause being put together by locals who care about the elderly in our community.

Neighborhood Plans

Last week, Crystal and I attended a Board of Adjustment hearing related to a Ward 3 development. I was drawn to the meeting by a flurry of neighborhood interest, and questions I was being asked about the process followed in approving the project. We seem to be at the point where we will need a study session in which to talk about how Neighborhood Plans (NP) fit into the whole planning and development process we are navigating around the community. We need clarity on what their role really is.

A couple of years ago Mayor & Council approved a change to the Houghton East Neighborhood Plan to allow the development of a Fry’s, other retail, and a gas station on a site out by Saguaro National Monument East. I voted against the NP amendments because I felt there were issues that were being left unaddressed which we would have to confront when the rezoning hearing came back to us. That turned out to be the case; the rezoning was approved (6-1) and the site is still undeveloped while Fry’s shuts down stores all over town. The NP is now changed to allow a certain height on that site that was not previously allowed. The other items in that process that were changed during the rezoning include things like: drainage, open space, excavating in a habitat proscribed in the NP, buffers, and more. I continue to believe those items are inconsistent with the HENP.

Compare that to the Plan amendment we just approved for the Benedictine. In that case, we did make changes to the NP in multiple, and very detailed ways. We discussed height, public outreach, public use of the monastery, historic preservation – things that some in the process said overstepped what we should be changing in a NP. Those people wanted those changes left for the rezoning process. I opted to front-load the changes in order to build trust in how the final product would evolve. 

The project we saw at the Board of Adjustment last week is in the Mountain View Neighborhood Association (MVNA).  Their NP was being amended in order to allow the project. What we heard at the Board of Adjustment was that the only item being amended had to do with the density that would be allowed on the site. When residents raised concerns that the density under discussion would have collateral impacts (traffic and drainage in particular) we were told those issues were not relevant to what was before the Board. The Board of Adjustment ultimately ruled 7-0 to allow the project.

What the MVNA was told, was that changes to their NP only needed to be in ‘general conformity’ with what their Plan said in order to be given administrative approval; but, the Uniform Development Code says ‘conformance’ means:

To be ‘in agreement with’ or ‘to comply with’ is not the same as being in ‘general conformity’.  At least, it is not clear to me how they are equivalent. 

To add to the confusion in the MVNA project, they were being told NPs must give way to the Unified Development Code (UDC) and to more General Plans such as Plan Tucson. That means the General modifies the Specific. That does not make sense. 

We heard that the form of development being performed in MVNA’s project (a Flexible Lot Development) does not need to comply with the NP because FLDs are found in the UDC; but the UDC says its terms need to comply with NPs. It does not carve out FLDs for some special exemption. Otherwise, NPs mean nothing when someone is using that procedure in developing their property. In fact, this language also appears in the UDC:

And this:

It would appear NPs are given weight, even when considering projects using the FLD process.

This all may seem in the weeds, but it’s important we come to an understanding about what role NPs play in the whole development process, what ‘general conformity’ means in determining the relevance of specific NP guidelines, who makes those determinations, and how the Plan Amendment process begins. This is what is shown on the city website:

Yet, last week I was told that in order to initiate the Plan Amendment process, I would have to write a letter requesting that to begin, not the applicant. That is a new and rather novel reading of the clear language of the UDC. 

All of this deserves a public conversation. With that in mind, I will be submitting a request for a study session discussion of the various topics I am sharing with you here. If NPs are meaningful components to how areas are developed, they need to be honored in the planning process. If staff is in the position to simply confer ‘general conformity’ on proposed projects, NPs are little more than aspirational commentary and of no real force and effect on the process. All parties involved in the development process deserve clarity on those questions.

Tucson Residents for Responsive Government is hosting a forum out at the Sentinel Building, 320 N. Commerce Loop Road. Their topic is NPs. It is coming on Thursday, April 4th from 6pm until 8pm. A few neighborhoods that are considering changes to their Plans will be sharing their work. Planning staff will also be on hand to talk about NPs and the challenges involved in re-writing them. Obviously, my study session will not happen ahead of the TRRG meeting. If your neighborhood is discussing its Plan, attend the TRRG meeting, and also stay tuned for the study session discussion I’ll be asking for later this spring.

Water Security

This is a shot from an article I pulled from the Philadelphia Inquirer. It ran last week. The headline speaks to how the whole PFAS/PFOS contamination issue is getting some serious attention on a nationwide basis:

New Jersey orders five companies to pay millions to fund PFAS cleanup

by Justine McDaniel and Laura McCrystal, Updated: March 25, 2019 

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection began an effort to hold five manufacturers of the PFC’s accountable for polluting their water. The companies are 3M, DuPont, DowDuPont, Chemours, and Solvay. We are in litigation with some of them as well.

The estimate from New Jersey is that the cleanup could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Look back at some of my newsletters and you will recall that the huge liability and cost of remediation is a primary reason I pushed for our own involvement in product manufacturer litigation. I did not want to wait on the military to figure out their role.

We are spending money on measuring the extent of the contamination in and around Tucson. New Jersey has already spent in excess of $3M on their own investigation of the chemicals. They are also one of the first states moving towards their own regulations of the PFCs. Do not count on Arizona joining in that progressive effort.

Do not count on the federal EPA to lead the way either. One of the New Jersey Commissioner’s, Catherine McCabe, is quoted as having said, “The current EPA plan leaves millions of Americans exposed to harmful chemicals for too long by choosing a drawn-out process that will delay establishing a federal maximum contaminant level for PFAS.” Right on!

New Jersey is thought to be one of the most contaminated areas of the country. Samples taken from 20 of their 21 counties contained at least one compound from the PFC class of chemicals. Last year another state study showed that all surface water samples taken from 11 waterways and ecosystems from that state contained the chemicals. It also travels into the food chain. New Jersey fish also show contamination levels. 

While it is unlikely that Tucson has any such level of contamination, we’re working with the DOD on studying where PFOS/PFAS is in our well system, and we’re discussing with them a variety of containment and treatment methods. 

Davis-Monthan (DM) issued a report on their efforts recently. I have gone through the 376-page report and can tell you that it’s underwhelming. The report contains pages and pages of maps showing where they are testing, and equally lengthy pages of summary tables showing the data they are gathering. Here is an example of what you would see in the report:

Aerial maps like this, and data tables like this:

Then, there are the obligatory “Summary of Daily Activity” pages:

So, it is nearly 400 pages of lots of tables, reports and aerials.

The report does not draw any conclusions, nor does it admit to any culpability for polluting our water wells north of the DM runway. It does make this sort of bureaucratic statement suggesting the need for more in-depth study of that area:

We know the contaminants have migrated off base. We have tested and found them to be present. The report is a wonderful example of how slowly the Feds move, and why our product manufacturer litigation is the direction we need to head. 

Our legal team participated in the case status conference on February 25th in Charleston, South Carolina. Paul Napoli, our representative is being considered to be one of the lead plantiffs. I knew when I asked our own staff to meet with him and his team that his resume was impressive. I predict that within the month we hear that the Court agrees.

Right now, we’re a part of a multi-plaintiff lawsuit. Here is how the litigants break down:

Type of Plaintiff/ Number of Consolidated Cases

Class Actions/Individual Personal Injury Cases: 76

Municipalities (Cities and Counties): 8

Private Water Districts: 1

Public Water Districts: 3

State Attorneys General: 1 (transfer has been opposed by NY AG)

The judge in the case is Judge Gergel. He will meet with the co-lead counsel’s once they are named and sort out how the case will proceed. He will request ‘fact sheets’ from each side and use those to put together a plan for ‘discovery’ in the case. The sides were asked whether there was any potential for an early mediated settlement. We are too early in this for carving out a settlement, but it happened in Minnesota, so I’m hopeful that we’ll get 3M and the others to come to the table and agree on settling this without having to go through the time and expense of litigating. Our next status conference is April 5th.

Good for New Jersey for moving forward as they are. 

We are moving forward investigating the local situation with DM, and importantly, we are now engaged in the legal process against the companies who pushed these chemicals out into the marketplace. I will keep you posted as our case continues to move through the legal process.

And one final note. DM in their own report acknowledges how persistent these chemicals are once they get into the environment. This statement comes from their own study:

Everyone agrees on the toxicity of the chemicals. The EPA will not set a maximum contaminant level. New Jersey is pushing ahead with their own MCLs, and we are moving ahead in court. 

More Litigation – Rosemont Mine

The Star ran a piece on Saturday announcing that Hudbay (Rosemont) is hiring in anticipation of opening their mine in the Santa Rita Mountains. At the end of last week a group of four conservation-minded groups filed a joint lawsuit hoping to stop the mine altogether. So nothing is a done deal quite yet, on that major excavation into the scenic mountainside.

The groups who have filed the lawsuit are represented by the Western Mining Action Project. That is a public-interest law firm that specializes in western state mining issues. The four groups joined in the suit are Save the Scenic Santa Ritas, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, and the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition. The Arizona Mining Reform Coalition represents another 16 organizations who are working on mining law reform, so the group of four might actually be better described as a 20-member group who are pursuing this litigation. 

The lawsuit challenges the Clean Water Act permit that was issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers last month. Very simply put, the suit claims the Army Corps of Engineers ignored reports filed by multiple governmental agencies, each of which stated the mine fails to comply with federal law. 

Lots of testimony and conflicting evidence has been put forward by both sides in this – one side claiming the environmental damage will be irreversible (a position with which I agree), and the mine side pointing to ‘mitigation’ efforts that will lessen the impacts. Here is the undeniable reality. Blasting a mile wide and half-mile deep hole into the Santa Ritas will produce a scar on an area that is not going to be patched up in any of our lifetimes. It is 5,000 acres of tailings ponds, waste dumps, the open pit, processing plants, and the expansion of roadways leading into and from the site. Setting aside all of the groundwater arguments (which are compelling to me), that set of impacts may not be honestly disputed.

This is an aerial that was taken several years ago. It shows mining activity and the environmental impact it has already caused in Southern Arizona. The EPA wrote in opposition to Rosemont on multiple occasions in the past 5 years. Now they have flipped, and you can see from the photo what is at stake.

I will, right now, invite the guy who is on the Hudbay payroll who calls each time I write in opposition to their mine to save his dime. I know the pitch, and I don’t buy the notion that degrading the Santa Ritas in the ways that are planned is worth the temporary influx of jobs it will create. That is a philosophical difference of opinion. I am pulling for the plaintiffs in this one, just as I am in the PFC lawsuit.


The RTA is the $2.1B one-cent sales tax that the voters approved back in 2006. It’s due to expire in 2026. Extending the tax will require approval by the state legislature, and then approval by the voters in Pima County. The first part of that process moved a bit forward last week with HB2109 passing through the State Senate Committee on Transportation. It is now headed for a full vote. 

The Town of Marana opposed the bill. So did their representative, Vince Leach. I found it interesting that the Southern Arizona Leadership Council (SALC) spoke in favor, citing local self-determination as the basis. I would love to see them vocal on the issue of state pre-emption when it comes to things like gun laws. Joining them was the Metro Chamber of Commerce. What really matters though is how Tucson voters feel. Marana is not going to carry the day when/if this comes to a public vote.

HB2109 asks for an increase in the current ½-cent tax up to a full cent. What is not included in the bill is any discussion of things such as what the money will go to fund, and if there is any inclination of changing the one jurisdiction-one vote manner in which current RTA funds are disbursed. There are nine members in the Pima Association of Governments. Tucson gets the same vote, as does Marana, Oro Valley, and all the rest of the members. That will be a topic of conversation if this measure ever gets through the legislature, is signed by Ducey, passes the Pima County Board of Supervisors, and is then finally adopted by the voters.

I have stated for the past six years that without road repair being a part of any new RTA tax, it will not, and it should not pass. I will also be advocating for acknowledgement of Complete Streets roadway design, at least within the City of Tucson, and the weighted voting conversation will need to be had. RTA2 is making its way through the State legislature. If it gets through that process, I would suspect a November 2020 vote is not out of the question.

Sonoran Corridor

A few years ago, when Patrick McNamara was working at the Star, he and I had numerous conversations about the importance of development out around what has called the Sonoran Corridor, the connection between I-10 and I-19 that runs in the general area of Raytheon, Tucson International Airport, and the Port-of-Tucson. I have worked hard to see the downtown core revitalize, but those are largely service sector jobs. The jobs we could see emerge on the Sonoran Corridor should be logistics, manufacturing and technology in support of the large employers who are already located in the area. It is an immensely important area, unique in the state.

The State Department of Transportation is teaming up with the Federal Highway Administration in conducting environmental impact analyses tied to some options for where exactly the corridor might run. They are asking for public input on the various alternatives.

The public comment period runs through April 22nd. The Draft Corridor Selection Report (CSR) can be seen at this link:  Review the Draft CSR here. Or, you can go to the ADOT website at to see the full Draft report. There were 12 alternatives identified through prior public outreach. That analysis is included in the Draft. Through this EIS, a range of alternatives will be identified, along with a possible “No Build” alternative depending on the results of this current outreach. The process has been going on for a couple of years and is nearing completion. If you have questions or comments, there are a few different ways you can let the folks at ADOT and the FHWA know. You can email them to, call them at 1.855.712.8530, or mail your comments to Sonoran Corridor Tier 1 EIS Study Team c/o Joanna Bradley, 1221 S. Second Ave, Mail Drop T100, Tucson, 85713.

This is an important area for development. It includes air transport of cargo, rail, over the road and international trade. The development needs to take place respecting the environmental challenges that exist. Look over the alternatives and let the people conducting the study know how you feel.

Transit Management

RATP was originally hired to manage our streetcar system. Last year they took on management of all three elements of our transit system on an interim basis. Those elements include the streetcar, Sun Tran and Sun Van. A Request for Proposals was issued late last year so we can eliminate the ‘interim’ label from the management team who is overseeing our system. That RFP process was concluded last week and RATP was selected to continue in their management role.

RATP is an international company, running transit systems in as varied locations as D.C., Ft. Worth, Waco, and Augusta, Georgia, and Mumbai, Algiers and Seoul, South Korea. They bring that wealth of experience to the table.

The contract is for five years. In being selected, RATP beat out First Transit, the only other bidder on the work. The five-year agreement comes with two additional options, a three-year and a two-year option. Whether or not those are awarded will be based on performance.

I agree with the value in having one company manage our entire transit system. There will be economies of scale RATP can exercise, adding efficiency to the management process. I look forward to working with the team as it continues in its role, but now with a solid five-year commitment behind their efforts.


I was running out by the loop this morning and saw a person flying his hobby drone. While I can certainly think of more productive ways to spend my time, if flying a drone flies his kite, so to speak, have at it. That is, as long as he’s following the rules in place that guide where they can be operated.

This came up last week in a question asked of me by a neighborhood leader. It seems some mid-town residents are less than amused with the person who is flying his drone above and into their back yards. The privacy concerns are legit. Since 2017 there have been some pretty clear guidelines that TPD follows when responding to drone calls.

Drone operations are broken into Commercial and Hobby. I am assuming the person I saw falls under the ‘hobby’ operator category since he was just amusing himself by flying over an open space area that is usually used as a dog run. The rules governing the differing operations are spelled out in the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 14, Chapter 1. TPD has a legal opinion out that summarizes the requirements.

If you are flying as a hobbyist, the guidelines include things such as:

  • A) Fly below 400’
  • B) Be aware of airspace restrictions (there are federal regs governing whose airspace you can fly into)
  • C) Keep your drone in sight
  • D) Avoid surrounding obstacles (I guess that means don’t use telephone poles as a drone slalom course)
  • E) Never fly over stadiums or groups of people
  • F) Never fly while under the influence of alcohol or drugs
  • G) Stay away from emergency response areas (like forest fires)
  • H) And, of course, don’t fly near other aircraft. 

Nothing particularly surprising there. If you’re flying commercial, the rules include:

  • A) Operators must be at least 16 years of age, pass an FAA test and be vetted by the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA.)
  • B) The aircraft must be under 55 lbs in weight, and must be registered with the FAA
  • C) You must maintain a visual line of sight, fly only in the daytime and fly under 400’
  • D) You must fly at less than 100 mph, yield to manned aircraft, and you may not fly from a moving vehicle. 

The same ‘don’t fly over people’ sorts of safety measures apply to commercial drone operation.

One safety measure that all operators must comply with is to notify Tucson International and DM if you are going to fly within five miles of their airspace. The air traffic control tower must be given prior notice if you are going to enter that zone. In Tucson, that is most of the City. I don’t know whether or not the guy out by the loop was within that notification zone, but if you own one of these things, and if you’re flying either as a hobby or commercially, you’d be safest in checking in with TIA and DM before taking off. It’s a safety issue that needs to be respected.

If you are hovering outside people’s windows, there are some potential privacy-related ordinances that could be brought to bear on that snooping. Be responsible, and be respectful in the way you operate your drone.

Local First

This week’s local Tucson is a big thanks to Diana Wilson and her family, as well as to Abby Green and the others from Highland Vista who pitched in to put together their Porch Fest last weekend. Diana welcomed me and Diatones, the band of young people who followed my set, to her home for some music. There were three other ‘porches’ and 6 other sets of musicians represented. These are a great way to build community as residents just meander from porch to porch, listen to a little music and spend time outdoors with neighbors.

If your neighborhood has not done one of these events, just Google Porch Fest Tucson and several will pop up. You can reach out to those groups for tips on how to do one of your own.

While they are not uniquely Tucson, ours have our own special feel – because we are Tucson. And that is special.

Top Dog City

Last year I wrote a piece in which Tucson was ranked as one of the top ‘dog friendly’ towns in the U.S. We got a similar recognition last week. Technobark (I am not making that up) researched over 300 American cities on a variety of ‘dog’ standards. Those included things such as the number of dog parks, dog beaches (we didn’t score well on that criterion), the number of active veterinary services, including 24-hour pet service, dog-friendly restaurants, and the kinds of dog-friendly activities that exist in the area. That includes things such as hiking, open space where they can just romp, and those sorts of amenities. 

The jury is in, and we ranked #10 nationally. Here are the final standings – just the top 10:

If you eliminate the cities with beaches (an unfair category, but they didn’t ask me when they put the contest together) Tucson is only behind Austin. So give your pooch a pat on the head and let him/her know how lucky dogs are to live here, and that I look forward to seeing them out on the loop early in the morning, walking their ‘master’.

Maynards to the Moon

The progress report towards the 238,000 mile goal looks like this:

Which means the 574 of us who took part are planning a ‘touch-down’ party tonight at Maynards. Come by and join us on the patio for the celebration. We started this journey last summer, and I have given weekly updates along the way. Here are the final team standings:

The city court workers (Moon Spinners) cleaned the City Manager’s clock by a few thousand miles. I am guessing Ortega did not add many, if any miles to that total or they may have made a more respectable showing. 

Individual standings look like this:

Yeah, well…Garey is a cyclist. He rolls downhill for three miles and gets credit for the same effort I put in slogging along on foot, but we have finally landed. For those who took part, congratulations on having invested in your health. For all the rest, let this be a nudge for you to find some sort of activity that’ll help your physical and mental fitness. They are linked.

Meet Me At Maynards continues each Monday at 5:30. They leave from the Historic Depot downtown. Stop in and see what they are about. A heart-felt thanks to Jannie Cox for having spearheaded the Moon Walk. It would not have happened without her inspiration.


Steve Kozachik
Council Member, Ward 6

Events & Entertainment


April 6th & 7th @ Saturday 12pm-10pm., Sunday 11am-9pm

Place: Historic Downtown Tucson – Jácome Plaza and surrounding areas, 101 N Stone Avenue


The Tucson Folk Festival takes place in Historic Downtown Tucson with all 6 venues within walking distance of Jácome Plaza (corner of Stone and Pennington). Over 120 musical acts, including many of Tucson’s favorites, will provide some of the best traditional, contemporary, ethnic folk, and acoustic music guaranteed to delight and entertain the whole family. The festival also includes a variety of memorable activities to experience: mouth-watering culinary options on the Church Avenue Food Court; Festival Beer Garden; Stefan George Memorial Songwriting Competition; Young Artist Showcase; Family Show; an instrument petting zoo; kids activities; free, interactive music workshops and the festival store.

Tucson Kitchen Musicians Association (TKMA) is proud to present the 34th Annual Tucson Folk Festival on April 6 – 7, 2019 in historic Downtown Tucson, one of the oldest FREE folk music festivals in the country! The National Headliner for 2019, performing Saturday April 6 at 9 p.m. on Jácome Plaza, is Red Molly. Combining the forces of three female songwriters with unique character and style, Red Molly creates a show that is larger than the sum of its parts. Known for their 3-part harmony, their songs and arrangements lay bare a love of vocal blend. The band weaves together threads of American music—from country & blues to folk & bluegrass. Their innovative instrumentation is suited for roots-rock and heartful ballads alike, and the alchemy of their personalities onstage draws even back row listeners into a sense of intimacy. Red Molly is simply a joy to experience. The Guardian described their music as “sunnyside Americana” with “immaculate vocal harmonies”, and Time Out NY described their show as featuring “a blend of serious harmonizing chops and slick pop savvy.” Red Molly will be performing Saturday, April 6 at 9:00 p.m. on the Jácome Plaza.

The Tucson Folk Festival takes place in Historic Downtown Tucson with all 6 venues within walking distance of Jácome Plaza (corner of Stone and Pennington). Over 120 musical acts, including many of Tucson’s favorites, will provide some of the best traditional, contemporary, ethnic folk, and acoustic music guaranteed to delight and entertain the whole family. The festival also includes a variety of memorable activities to experience: mouth-watering culinary options on the Church Avenue Food Court; Festival Beer Garden; Stefan George Memorial Songwriting Competition; Young Artist Showcase; Family Show; an instrument petting zoo; kids activities; free, interactive music workshops and the festival store.

More information can be found at


April 6 @ 10:00 am - 12:00 pm

Armory Park


This historic district displays how Tucson developed residentially after the arrival of the railroad and can be viewed as Tucson’s first suburb.  Led by Historian Ken Scoville, the tour will feature landmark buildings on Scott St. such as the Carnegie Library, now Children’s Museum Tucson.  The architecture, layout, and landscape in the area connect to the “City Beautiful” movement that was heavily influenced by the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago.  This exposition heralded the “modern world” with a revival of Beaux Arts architecture and the belief that cities should be beautiful places.  The now vanished Camp Lowell, Armory Building, and the Santa Rita Hotel will also be discussed.


marchforsciencesaz's profile pictureSaturday, April 13, from 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM

Georges DeMeester Performance Center, Reid Park


March For Science Southern Arizona, a nonprofit advocacy group promoting science and scientific research, will present the “Rally for Science 2019” on Saturday, April 13, from 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM at the Georges DeMeester Performance Center, Reid Park, Tucson.
This is the third year the Rally for Science has been presented. The event provides an opportunity for Southern Arizona residents to meet, network, and rally for the critical role of science in the community. Exhibitors representing Southern Arizona’s diversity in science and science advocacy will be present at the Rally, which has attracted more than 4,000 participants in the past. Hands-on science experiments, activities for children, talks and demonstrations will be presented in a family-friendly environment.
For more information on March For Science Southern Arizona and the Rally for Science 2019, visit


Arizona State Museum, 1013 E University Blvd |

Arizona Theater Company, 330 S Scott Ave |

Children's Museum Tucson, 200 S 6th Ave |

Fox Theatre, 17 W Congress St |

Hotel Congress, 311 E Congress St |

Jewish History Museum, 564 S Stone Ave |

Loft Cinema, 3233 E Speedway Blvd |

Meet Me at Maynards, 311 E Congress St |
A social walk/run through the Downtown area. Every Monday, rain or shine, holidays too! Check-in begins at 5:15 pm.

Mission Garden, 946 W Mission Ln |
A living agricultural museum and ethnobotanical garden at the site of Tucson's Birthplace (the foot of "A-Mountain"). For guided tours call 520-955-5200

Rialto Theatre, 318 E Congress St |

The Rogue Theatre, The Historic Y, 300 E University Blvd |

Southern Arizona Transportation Museum, 414 N Toole Ave |

Tucson Botanical Gardens, 2150 N Alvernon Way |

Tucson Convention Center, 260 S Church St |

Tucson Museum of Art, 140 N Main Ave |

UA Mineral Museum, 1601 E University Blvd |

Watershed Management Group, Living Lab 1137 N. Dodge Blvd. |

Yume Japanese Gardens of Tucson2130 North Alvernon Way |