Speak Out at SCRPC Meeting March 27

The push toward urbanism is in full swing and if not stopped could be the end of our freedom in this country! Citizens of the Strafford region are invited to speak to the agenda items below. Statements shall be limited to 3 minutes.

Strafford Regional Planning Commission
Commissioners Meeting
150 Wakefield Street, Suite 12, Conference Rm. 1A
Rochester, NH 03867
Thursday, March 27, 2014
7-9:00 PM

AGENDA
1. Welcome/Introductions

2. Presentation(s):
Presenter: Kyle Barker, AIA, Barker Architects, Inc.
Topic: Compact Cottage-Style Neighborhoods

Kyle Barker’s presentation will look at the historic and current development patterns and explore the social and economic impacts of those patterns compared to a new compact design. The benefits of denser, smaller-scale development will be addressed utilizing a case study involving underdeveloped lots in Concord, NH

Presenter: Ashley Iber, Executive Director, Workforce Housing Coalition of the Greater Seacoast
Topic: Introduction to Workforce Housing Coalition

Ashlee Iber, Executive Director of the Workforce Housing Coalition of the Greater Seacoast, will also be presenting an Introduction to the Workforce Housing Coalition, an organization focused on addressing housing challenges in the region through education and outreach initiatives.

3. Action Item (motion required):
3.1 Draft minutes of September 26, 2013
3.2 Draft minutes of November 21, 2013
3.3 Approval of Vision Statement(s) for Regional Master Plan

4. Other Business

5. Citizen’s Forum – Citizens of the Strafford region are invited to speak only to agenda items. Statements shall be limited to three minutes.

6. Adjournment

Reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Include a description of the accommodation you will need including as much detail as you can. Also include a way we can contact you if we need more information. Make your request as early as possible; please allow at least 5 days advance notice. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill. Please call (603) 994-3500 or email srpc@strafford.org

***In the case of inclement weather, cancellation announcements will be made on: WTSN 1270 AM & WOKQ 97.5 FM

EPA Moves to Control All Water

“Wyoming welder Andrew Johnson had a state permit, so he thought he was building a perfectly legal stock water pond for his livestock where Six Mile Creek runs through his private farm in Uinta County.

But U.S. Environmental Protection Agency enforcers said Johnson was actually building a dam in violation of the Clean Water Act.

Johnson’s permit from the Wyoming State Engineer’s office to build a “stock reservoir” is dated June 28, 2010, reflecting years of his careful preparations for the pond, including visits by EPA and Army Corps of Engineers agents to see the work, followed by a cordial multi-agency conference call in mid-2013 in which everything seemed fine.

Then, on Jan. 28, without notice and without due process, EPA regional bureaucrat Andrew M. Graydosh issued a compliance order requiring Johnson to return the creek to its original condition in 60 days.”

In NH, control over your water starts with regionalism. Remember in 2005 they tried to take over the private wells of Bedford residents by eminent domain. And they will try to do it again…

Read More…

The Agenda of the Climate Hoax

Maurice Strong is an oil billionaire with a criminal past. He’s used the UN to promote the climate change agenda, and with a purpose.

You don’t need a subscription to this excellent show. Listen to this first hour and hear about how ‘climate change’ is a hoax to promote Agenda 21 which is the goal to number and take control over everything on the earth.

http://zml-s3.zoomerradio.s3.amazonaws.com/podcasts/conspiracy/2014-03-16-conspiracy-show.mp3

HB 1124 Must Be Stopped in NH Senate

The NH Municipal Association, using our tax dollars, lobbied to support HB 1124.

This bill permits towns to opt out of official ballot voting requirements for the consideration and adoption of zoning ordinances.

It gives the towns more time to hold hearings and loosens up the requirements for placing the changes on the town’s ballot, etc. But could it work toward removal of the voter’s right to have a say in zoning changes at all?

This passed the NH House.

Whether this bill would give the right of towns to opt out of official ballot voting at all, is what we are concerned about. This is the goal of the Regional Planning Commissions, however.

This bill must be watched for when it gets to the NH Senate.

Please ask your NH Senators to make sure it does NOT remove the right of the voters to approve zoning changes as that would give RPCs too much power over the local boards.

Nice Work if You Can Get It

Regional Protectors or Watermelons?
NRPC Executive Committee Meeting 07-18-12

H/T GNTP

I, along with about 6 other people, attended the July, 2012 Executive Committee meeting of the Nashua Regional Planning Commission (NRPC), in an attempt to gain a better understanding of how this “advisory” Regional Planning entity operates.

The 9 RPCs in New Hampshire were created as “political subdivisions” in approximately 1969, and operate under RSA 36 (45-53).

The public portion of the meeting lasted about 33 minutes (see video, likely tomorrow), and was followed by a non-public session, where the visitors from the public had to leave, as the committee discussed sensitive issues relating to personnel, hiring, firing, promotion, salaries, etc. of public employees.

You can imagine my surprise when the non-public portion of the meeting lasted nearly 90 minutes (with me waiting in the lobby). I have been on a school board before, and I never experienced a non-public session that lasted any more than 20 minutes, except when dealing with a very complicated lawsuit against the school district.

To be sure that the committee members knew that I was waiting outside to rejoin the meeting after non-public portion ended, I left my camera tripod and power cord in the room.

At about 8pm, someone opened the doors and told me that the non-public portion had ended. I reentered the room, and the committee took a vote to adjourn.

As I understand it, per RSA 91-A:3-I-b, the committee is supposed to specifically identify the issue(s) or “exemptions” that cause them to go into a non-public session, with enough detail to identify the general nature of the issue but not enough to give away any sensitive details. They are also supposed to take a roll call vote, querying each member of the committee, which they did not do.

The video, and the meeting, is relatively uneventful (sausage making), but it stands as a record of the proceedings, and evidence that non-public proceedings were not properly conducted.

One of the key topics of the meeting was the draft budget update, in preparation for the annual audit. I have provided a summary of this 2011-2012 budget, and highlight some of the notable facts:

Income: $1,471,710.19

The NRPC received $270,872.50 (18%) of its income from “Federal Contracts”, mainly from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) “Sustainable Communities” Regional Planning grants (more on the Sustainable Communities Initiative in the coming weeks).

The NRPC received $162,581.29 (11%) from “Local Dues”, paid by the 13 member towns of Amherst, Brookline, Hollis, Hudson, Litchfield, Lyndeborough, Mason, Merrimack, Milford, Mont Vernon, Nashua, Pelham, and Wilton.

The NRPC received $219,902.59 from “Grants”. These are a mix of what look to be mostly state grants, including “Safe Route to School” (SRTS), Broadband, SWD, Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) Ventures, NH Charitable Foundation (NHCF), and some others.

The NRPC received $778,741.24 (53%) from “State Contracts”. These included Office of Energy and Planning (OEP) stimulus funding, DOT Highway Planning, Souhegan Valley Transportation Collaborative (SVTC), DES, and OEM.

The NRPC received $125,178.68 (8.5%) from “Local Planning Contracts”.

Expenses: $1,443,048.72

The NRPC spent $9,750 on their annual audit.

The NRPC spent $8173.07 on Dues and Subscriptions.

The NRPC spent $11,006 on Insurance.

The NRPC spent $414,859.09 (29%) on “Professional Services”, sub-contracting work.

The NRPC spent $643,696.31 (45%) on Employee Salaries (14 paid staff members).

The NRPC spent $205,411.08 (15%) on Employee Benefits.

The NRPC spent $11,862.92 on Utilities.

The NRPC spent $78,477.12 on Rent (that is approx. $6540 per month).

Income/(Loss): $28,661.47

I will spend some time in the coming months, digging further into the activities of the NRPC, highlighting the good, and the bad, that they do with our tax dollars, trying to understand how an “advisory board” gets to manage this much money, and why 58% of the budget goes to employee salaries and benefits (remember that there are 9 of these RPCs).

I can guarantee, from research already done, that the “bad” that is involved will shock and concern you, if you value your individual liberties, and personal, private property rights.

Stay tuned.

PS – A “Watermelon” is Green on the outside, Red on the inside.

Keene Sentinel’s Sour Grapes

Here is a recent editorial decrying the will of the people of Rindge. They have rejected unelected regional boards, as all towns should.

“Not only did they defeat the warrant article to implement the overlay zone, they separately voted to remove those ideas and everything else that came out of the charrette from the town’s master plan. Then they voted to not allow the town to accept any funding from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development without town meeting’s OK. They did this because a HUD grant had funded the charrette and because of the unfounded fear that once the town accepts money from the federal government, local residents will have no say in the running of the town.”

This is correct. Once money is taken from HUD, HUD requires zoning and planning changes that eventually may not be in control of the people.

Everyone should take an example from Rindge.

Read more…

Bow voters reject public safety building plan

Bow voters reject public safety building plan
By Alllie Morris
Monitor staff
Friday, March 14, 2014

Bow residents overwhelmingly rejected plans to construct a $6.8 million public safety building, one year after a more expensive plan was narrowly defeated.

The condition of the station will have to wait until the meeting resumes March 24.
After an hour of voting, the tally came to 425-257. It needed a two-thirds majority to pass. A separate article, which would have approved a $200,000 geothermal heating and cooling system for the building, was also rejected, 410-271. The plan would have replaced the town’s outdated fire station with a new building housing the fire, police and emergency management departments across the street.

Read More…

Yes these town centers are all part of a huge push for urbanization of our small towns.