⚡ Project Blue's Water Grab: Rex Scott Admits Ignoring Constituents to Support the New Manifest Destiny in Tucson | Buckmaster Show Exclusive
When Pima County supervisors serve silicon over citizens while Tucson swelters in 114-degree heat
Based on the Buckmaster Show for 6/19/25, a daily radio show in Tucson, AZ, interviewing local newsmakers. Analysis and opinions are my own.
😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾
🤔 A Pima County supervisor named Rex Scott went on a 📻 radio show and basically admitted he doesn't care what his voters think.
He voted to approve a huge 💻 data center project that will use millions of gallons of 💧 water every day during the worst 🌵 drought in over 100 years, even though most people who contacted his office told him to vote against it.
Right after he voted ✅ yes, the ⚡ electric company announced they're raising everyone's bills by 📈 14%, which is exactly what people said would happen. It's like if your class voted against having a test but your teacher gave one anyway, then made you pay extra for ✏️ pencils.
The supervisor thinks he knows better than the people who elected him, which isn't really how democracy is supposed to work.
🗝️ Takeaways
🎭 Rex Scott openly admitted that most constituents opposed Project Blue but voted for it anyway
💧 The data center will consume millions of gallons during Arizona's worst drought in 126 years
⚡ TEP announced a 14% rate hike immediately after Scott's corporate-friendly vote
🏜️ The project will use drinking water for up to 2 years before maybe switching to reclaimed water
💰 State cost-shifts $112 million in obligations to counties while restricting revenue options
🚌 RTA gets new leadership with Mike Ortega as interim executive director
🎉 Tucson's 250+ anniversary celebration emphasizes Indigenous history and cultural exchange
🗳️ Scott's betrayal demonstrates how corporate capture undermines democratic representation
🌵 Lightning Strikes Twice: Rex Scott's Democratic Dysfunction in the Desert
When supervisors serve silicon over citizens while Tucson swelters
The desert heat wasn't the only thing reaching dangerous levels on June 19th when Pima County Board of Supervisors Chair Rex Scott appeared on the Buckmaster Show.
Broadcasting from the appropriately named Green Things Zocalo Village Studios, Scott delivered a masterclass in political gaslighting that would make even the most seasoned Trump-era spin doctors blush.
The Corporate Coup: Project Blue's Water Grab
Let's establish the stakes here, hermanos y hermanas.
Arizona is experiencing its worst drought in 126 years. The Colorado River's reservoirs—Lake Mead and Lake Powell—are sitting at roughly 35-40% capacity, levels not seen since they were first filled decades ago.
You can literally see the "bathtub ring" of white mineral deposits on canyon walls, marking where water levels used to be 100+ feet higher.
Indigenous communities across the Southwest are fighting for basic water access while golf courses stay emerald green. And into this climate catastrophe rides Project Blue—a massive data center complex that will devour millions of gallons of water daily to keep servers cool while our communities literally run dry.
Because nothing says "sustainable development" quite like air-conditioning computers in the middle of the Sonoran Desert during a historic drought.
Scott's defense of this environmental atrocity revealed the stunning contempt elected Democrats can harbor for their own constituents. When host Bill Buckmaster pressed him about community opposition, Scott made perhaps the most damning admission in recent Pima County political history:
"The majority of people who have contacted our office about this project have encouraged us to oppose it." —Rex Scott
Read that again.
The supervisor—whose job literally consists of representing his constituents—openly admitted that the people who elected him overwhelmingly opposed his vote.
His response?
Pure political arrogance wrapped in technocratic jargon: "We don't conduct plebiscites on every issue that comes before us. If you're elected to be in a policy-making, decision-making role, your responsibility is to take all of the evidence, all of the factors into account, and make an informed judgment."
Translation: "I know better than you peasants who pay my salary."
The Timing That Tells All
The corporate duplicity became crystal clear when, hours after Scott's vote on Project Blue, Tucson Electric Power announced a 14% rate increase.
Community members had warned this would happen—data centers consume enormous amounts of electricity, straining grids and driving up costs for everyone else.
Scott's response to this perfectly predicted outcome? Classic deflection:
"The timing couldn't have been worse. But there is absolutely no connection between that residential rate increase that is based on past use of power and Project Blue, which is, of course, going to be making use of power in the future."
Right, because electricity demand works like a time machine—future massive consumption has no impact on present rate structures. Economics 101 according to corporate-captured politicians.
The supervisor even had the audacity to claim TEP had "assured" that ratepayers wouldn't be affected by the data center's electricity demands. Those assurances evaporated faster than desert morning dew when TEP immediately announced rate hikes that will burden working families already struggling with inflation and housing costs.
Water Wars: The Reclaimed Reality Check
Scott's cavalier attitude toward water consumption during a historic drought exposed the environmental blindness that characterizes corporate-captured governance.
Project Blue will initially use potable water—the kind humans actually need to survive—for up to two years before maybe transitioning to reclaimed water via an 18-mile pipeline that doesn't currently exist.
"What we heard on Tuesday is that the goal of getting to 100% reclaimed water would, they would like to achieve that within two years," Scott explained, as if corporate promises about environmental mitigation have any meaningful track record of fulfillment.
"They would like to achieve"—the same language oil companies use when promising to clean up spills they never actually clean up.
This isn't just about water policy—it's about environmental justice. While corporations get guaranteed access to millions of gallons for profit-generating servers, Indigenous communities across Arizona still lack reliable access to clean water.
The Navajo Nation, located less than 200 miles north, has thousands of residents without access to running water, yet Pima County is literally giving away public resources to cool computer equipment.
The Democratic Betrayal
What makes Scott's corporate capitulation particularly devastating is that he's supposedly a Democrat—a member of the party that claims to champion environmental protection and responsive government. Apparently, those principles evaporate when campaign contributions and "economic development" opportunities materialize.
Scott's justification relied on the classic neoliberal playbook: promise jobs, invoke tax revenue, and trust corporations to self-regulate. He claimed that Project Blue would create "ripple effects" for future economic development, echoing the same trickle-down mythology that Republicans have peddled for decades.
"There is every possibility when you approve a project like this one that there will be a ripple effect in terms of future economic development projects that are inspired by this one, connected with this one," Scott pontificated, apparently forgetting that corporate welfare rarely generates the promised benefits for working communities.
The supervisor even praised the "extraordinary infrastructure" the developer would build, as if private companies constructing profit-generating facilities constituted public investment. It's like thanking McDonald's for building a drive-through—they're not doing it for community benefit.
Transportation Theater: RTA's Revolving Door Rewards
Scott's praise for the Regional Transportation Authority's new leadership revealed another layer of governmental gaslighting. Former Tucson City Manager Mike Ortega has landed the interim executive director role, which Scott hailed as bringing "extraordinary experience in government" and "great intellectual energy."
Because nothing says "fresh perspective" quite like recycling the same government insiders through different taxpayer-funded positions.
What Scott conveniently omitted—and what reporting at the Tucson Sentinel revealed—is that Ortega just admitted, "I don't know the details of the current plan on the table, so I don't know the details of it. I've not been following it that closely."
This confession came from the person now managing $261 million in public funds, while earning $4.8 million annually in interest that could be used to build transit infrastructure, employing construction workers now instead of waiting for future jobs at Project Blue.
The RTA represents the opposite of "genuine public investment"—it's a case study in government accountability theater. After nearly 20 years of taxpayer funding, only 18 of the 35 voter-approved projects have been completed, while the PAG/RTA has pocketed millions in banking profits from idle funds.
Scott's demand for urgency rings particularly hollow: "If you need to schedule some additional meetings between now and September, do it."
The supervisor champions a democratic process for transportation planning, yet simultaneously demonstrates, through Rex Scott’s own actions, that public input holds little weight when corporate interests are involved.
It's remarkable how quickly politicians discover the virtues of community engagement when they're not profiting from ignoring it.
Budget Blues: State-Sanctioned Theft
Scott also addressed Pima County's budget challenges, revealing how conservative governance at the state level systematically undermines local communities. Arizona has shifted approximately $112 million in obligations to counties while maintaining constitutional requirements that make revenue increases nearly impossible at the state level.
"The state of Arizona has a balanced budget amendment as part of the Arizona Constitution. They also have, as part of the Arizona Constitution, since 1992, a requirement that any revenue measure... requires a two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature. That is unachievable," Scott explained.
This constitutional straitjacket forces counties to raise local property taxes to fund services the state should provide—a classic conservative shell game that shifts blame for tax increases to local officials while preserving state politicians' anti-tax credentials.
It's governance by extortion: states create impossible fiscal requirements, then blame counties for the resulting tax burdens.
Cultural Celebrations: Authentic Community Engagement
The show concluded with Amy Hartmann-Gordon from the Tucson Presidio Trust discussing the city's 250+ anniversary celebration. Her emphasis on the "plus" acknowledged Indigenous presence spanning millennia—a refreshing departure from the colonial erasure that typically accompanies such commemorations.
"People have been living in this area for thousands of years. And so we didn't want to just be focusing on that specific date. We really wanted to be focusing on the whole story of Tucson and the cultural exchange that has happened in our community for centuries," Hartman-Gordon explained.
This community-driven approach, coordinated through multiple cultural organizations at celebratetucson.com, demonstrated what authentic public engagement looks like—a stark contrast to Scott's performative democracy around Project Blue.
The celebration will feature lectures, food tastings, and cultural events, including presentations by local historian Dr. Tom Sheridan, author of "Los Tucsonenses." It's remarkable how easy genuine community engagement becomes when corporate profits aren't involved.
The Reader's Reality: Why This Matters
If you're a Tucson-area resident wondering why your water and electricity bills keep climbing while corporations get sweetheart deals, Rex Scott's Project Blue vote provides your answer.
This isn't abstract policy—it's your family's budget getting squeezed so data centers can profit from our public resources.
When Supervisor Rex Scott states there is no connection between Project Blue and TEP raising its rates, basic Econ 101 teaches that higher demand leads to higher prices. Data centers require a significant amount of additional electricity, which increases demand; no plebiscites are needed for this basic understanding.
The broader implications extend beyond utility bills.
When elected officials openly admit they're ignoring constituent voices, democratic participation becomes meaningless theater. Why call your supervisor if they've demonstrated that community opposition doesn't influence their votes? Why attend public hearings if testimony is just a political performance?
Scott's betrayal represents the corporate capture of Democratic politics—a party that increasingly serves capital while using progressive rhetoric to maintain voter loyalty. It's political catfishing on an institutional scale.
For Indigenous communities and environmental justice advocates, Project Blue represents another chapter in the centuries-long story of resource extraction that prioritizes corporate profits over community survival. The same colonial mentality that stole land now steals water, just with better marketing and Democratic enablers.
This is the New Manifest Destiny supported by Democrats Rex Scott and Dr. Matt Heinz on the same Indigenous Land they hypocritically acknowledged at the beginning of the meeting.
¿Qué Hacemos? Moving Forward
Hope isn't found in corporate-captured politicians but in organized community resistance.
Despite Scott's democratic dysfunction, Tucson's activist community continues building power despite being stuck with Scott and company until 2028. Environmental justice organizations, Indigenous water protectors, and community advocates are organizing pressure campaigns, ballot initiatives, and accountability actions that don't require waiting for electoral calendars.
The monsoon season is coming, and so is sustained community resistance.
The struggle for environmental justice and democratic accountability requires sustained community engagement. Corporate politicians like Rex Scott count on public apathy to enable their betrayals—proving them wrong requires showing up.
Support independent journalism by subscribing to Three Sonorans Substack—because corporate media won't hold corporate-captured politicians accountable. We need community-funded reporting to expose the connections between campaign contributions and policy betrayals.
What Do You Think?
Scott's admission that he ignored overwhelming constituent opposition raises fundamental questions about representative democracy: Should elected officials follow community wishes even when they personally disagree, or do representatives have obligations that transcend public opinion? How do we hold accountable politicians who openly admit they're dismissing their voters' concerns?
Share your thoughts below—because unlike some supervisors, we actually want to hear from our community.
Have a scoop or a story you want us to follow up on? Send us a message!
A few thoughts: 1) In addition to reporting on radio shows, it would be helpful to your readers if you would research and report on the money factor: How much money has Scott’s campaign received from TEP and/or the company building the data center? Does he personally own shares in either company? Of course, this reporting should be ongoing, so we can see how much he benefits over time. 2) How difficult is it for voters to request a recall vote for an elected official who is disenfranchising them by the way he votes? If it is nearly impossible, perhaps some changes to the State Constitution and/or City Charter are in order, so AZ voters can address the root of the problem. 3) I believe elected officials have a dual or perhaps triple ethical responsibility with respect to how they cast their votes. Their primary responsibility should be to represent the will of their constituency. Secondarily, they need to assess the legislation under consideration to make sure it does not violate any provisions of the Constitution (or city charter—whatever the founding document is for the position they were elected to). If it does violate any such provisions, it should be amended to correct those violations before a vote is taken. Finally, the elected official has a responsibility to assess the language of the bill to ferret out any potential unintended consequences it might lead to, and adjust the language to prevent those as well. And of course, they have a responsibility to communicate the issues they find to their constituents and seek input with respect to how these issues should be fixed.