It’s happening everywhere. Regionalism is taking precedence over local control.
Taxpayers find themselves at the mercy of a supposedly “advisory only regional planning commission” who then engages NGOs and other private entities to influence the elected governing bodies, who then shape and plan the area with complete disregard for what the local taxpayers would do, and how they would do it.
Here are just some examples that show NH is not alone… with excerpts that should sound very familiar. After reading these examples, one may get a better feel for what “regionalism” is all about. As Andrés Duany claims, cities and regions are more important government-wise, than states and towns.
Wind-farm rule revisions won’t see a vote by planning commission
“Under the Illinois Counties Code, a regional planning commission is responsible for making “a plan” for the region to “best promote health, safety, morals, order, convenience, prosperity, efficiency and economy in the process of development and the general welfare of said region.” The commission is described as a “fact-finding body” for the “planning and development” of the region.
The law does not say anything about the commission being allowed to make changes or recommend changes to ordinances.”
And, this from Vermont. Does “infill development” make sense with the title of the article?
Town plan focuses on energy, wildlife
“From the chapter on future land use: “The over-arching goal of the Land Use Plan is to guide growth and development by reinforcing Waterbury’s traditional pattern of concentrated settlement surrounded by rural countryside. This can be achieved by directing growth into areas most appropriate for development. The objective is not to prevent growth but rather to encourage ‘infill’ development within currently developed areas and to support additional development in areas identified as ‘Growth Centers.’”
Does this sound familiar?
Tahoe Regional Planning Association’s Shoreline Plan nears approval
“The proposed Shoreline Plan puts a cap on shoreline development imposing a limited number of new shoreline structures such as piers, buoys and public boat ramps. With the new regulations, new shoreline programs will be put in place aimed at addressing the environmental effects of shoreline activity and will be paid for through fees on moorings, boat stickers and boat rental concessions.”
Notice in the above article, the ‘advisory’ RPC suggests to the governing board that new taxes and fees be imposed, which is usually the end result of these unelected bureaucrats basically making the decisions for the voters.
And here is an example of the town creating a ‘cultural district’… as in, circus on every corner… This is not something most bedroom communities aspire to, but it is part of the “social engineering” present in most Master Plans.
Great Barrington prepares to celebrate its new cultural district
“The town pursued a cultural district designation as a result of its 2013 Master Plan. Arts organizations, nonprofits and businesses were convened to provide input. The selectboard then applied to the Massachusetts Cultural Council for the downtown area to be designated as a cultural district, and the application was unanimously approved by the council in August.”
And this town gave the county planning commission the boot, as should all towns and cities in NH.
Michigan county that’s tourist mecca nixes planning group
Here is proof that sustainablists don’t mind uglying up miles of natural landscape for the purpose of their failed alternative energy schemes… Notice the supporters gathered in force and wore similar shirts to show their positions?
Wind energy firm files for DeWitt County special-use permit. Here’s what’s next.
Granite State Future(s) will continue to present examples such as this in an attempt to monitor what goes on in other towns, cities and states to be able to make the public in New Hampshire aware of what could happen to their own state if “regionalism” is not dealt with in a timely fashion.