A plan to squeeze most residents of the San Francisco Bay Area into multifamily housing offers a test case of whether land-use bureaucracies nationwide, encouraged by the Obama administration, should be allowed to transform American lifestyles under the pretext of combating climate change.
Currently, 56 percent of households in the nine-county Bay Area live in single-family homes. That number would drop to 48 percent by 2030, under a high-density development blueprint called Plan Bay Area, recently enacted by the Association of Bay Area Governments and the region’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Plan Bay Area has already drawn several legal challenges, and the debate could spread nationwide if, as may happen, it becomes a model for regulators in other parts of the country.
Read More from CATO…
“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.”
“Most people still think that due to public pressure, Texas governor Rick Perry had abandoned the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor/NAFTA Superhighway project. That was true, however…
As Aaron Dykes of Truthstream Media finds out, the infrastructure and control grids have been quietly continued behind the scenes, and in true globalist fascist fashion, American roads are being handed over to foreign companies (see full story below). Drivers will not be the given the option – they will be forced to drive – and pay on the new fascist highway system in the US.
The EU is similarly pushing an identical system in tandem to NAFTA’s scheme – an EU scheme where bikers will even be forced to pay via RFID.
As we recently discovered in New York state, the car transponders that the corporate state are trying to mandate for all drivers to use RFID chip technology. One concerned NY citizen did an independent analysis on the many ways his car using NY’s ‘E-ZPass’ could be tracked and discovered that he was being tracked and his data traceable in unexpected places, far and away from any toll road barriers.
Known under the pseudonym of ‘Puking Monkey’, he drove around New York City only to find that his transponder became active multiple times on the short drive from Times Square to Madison Square Garden in mid-town Manhattan.”
Watch and listen to how many times his receiver triggers his makeshift reader alarm:
Visit the article above where you can follow many embedded links with examples… namely, the story from Truth Stream Media.
Here is an exerpt:
“…RFID transponders are about tracking more than toll payments – they are used by law enforcement and government agencies to monitor innocent citizens accused of no crime while logging detailed movements in a database:
Many toll road systems now use tracking devices for pay/authorization, and they have also been used by police to catch criminals. From the beginning, these transponders were designed as a payment collection system AS WELL AS a tracking system. Here’s a link to the patent proving that intention: “Open road cashless toll collection system and method using transponders and cameras to track vehicles.” Adding further insult to injury, states like Texas do not hire toll booth operators, refuse to take cash and require drivers to adopt transponders or pay much higher rates via mail after photographing license plates and auto-mailing a bill to the registered address for payment!”
Bad enough he’s meddled in NH business when it comes to second amendment rights, he’s now working for the globalists in order to impose their planned urban-based regional society upon America.
Bloomberg is the president of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (CCLG) which is comprised of 63 mayors from 40 major cities across the world collaboratively who have decided to alter the landscape of their cities to reflect answers to global warming by implementing Agenda 21 incrementally.
The C40 has expanded to 58 cities that use UN Agenda 21 regulations to monitor global populations, decrease CO2 emissions and affect the global gross domestic product (GDP). Being major cities, they have a tremendous influence over setting the standard for a “low carbon economy”.
What a shame we have some conservatives in NH that won’t do anything to stop this. They had their chance with HB 1573.
As we have reported before, the 9 RPCs in New Hampshire were created as “political subdivisions” in 1969, and operate under RSA 36 (45-53). They are taxpayer funded and thus subject to all NH’s 91-A (Right to Know) laws. You can see an example of one of their taxpayer-funded budgets here.
It would seem however, that their existence is fraught with contradictions. For example, while the state mandates the towns get help from the RPCs to write their master plans, towns are only paid members on a voluntary basis. Furthermore, when RPCs procure money for town projects through federal HUD grants, often there are requirements within those grants that would mandate zoning changes. This would seem to contradict the assertion that RPcs are “advisory only”. To make things worse, now some towns want to remove the right of the voters to approve zoning changes and there has even been a bill submitted to the NH legislature to allow this. HB 1124 permits towns to opt out of official ballot voting requirements for the consideration and adoption of zoning ordinances. The RPCs have used our tax money to hire lobbyists to promote these types of bills so they can push their agenda through even faster.
This succession of videos demonstrates the confusion over Regional Planning Commissions.
While RPCs are NOT NGOs, they are a layer of government over which the voters have little, if any oversight. Their boards are unelected. They interface with your town planning and zoning boards, but, does the voter get to vote on the changes they recommend, especially the ones mandated by these federal HUD/EPA/DOT grants they have procured on the town’s behalf?
RPCs may as well be NGOs since private corporations and their foundations and NGOs are their biggest influence. Private corporations have even provided them with PR firms to convince the voters that the ideas they promote are coming from the community when they are NOT.
This series of videos shows why towns are considering rejecting membership in this layer of unaccountable government.
To demonstrate just how little our legislature and local boards know about RPCs I present to you these videos.
In the first video, the Hampton Budget Committee is trying to figure out just what kind of group are the RPCs. One comes to the wrong conclusion that they are NGOs.
In this video, the Hampton Budget Committee states the requirement that towns take help from the Rockingham Planning Commission to write their master plan. This is correct.
At this meeting of the Hampton Board of Selectmen, Cliff Sinnott from the RPC is defending his existence and trying to prevent them from dropping membership. But one member says he doesn’t know who came up with these projects. Why? Because they are not coming from the community. In fact, Mr. Pierce states voters have turned down one particular project TWO OR THREE TIMES, a project that suddenly seems to pop back up when federal funds are dangled in front of the town. The RPC rep does state correctly that they are NOT a private entity but a layer of government created by the legislature.
In the following video, a citizen is discussing with the Hampton Planning Board the classifying of roofs, driveways, and walkways as “impervious surfaces” for the purpose of TAXATION. The board doesn’t want the voters to know this would restrict property rights, and claims it would be illegal to state that on the ballot, and yet the town can legally print a recommendation near the item that they recommend its passage. Go figure.
In this video the Board of Selectmen speak about the invisible strings that come with federal programs…
In this video, the Hampton Board of Selectmen wonder why they pay dues to the Regional Planning Commission and consider withdrawing. They seem to understand that it is another “central planning” body.
Now the question we have to ask is, do they even know what the Granite State Future program is?
Oh boy, hang on to your hats. If the push toward regionalism were not brazen enough, now the California Senate is looking to pass a bill to create a new political subdivision.
“California’s Senate Bill 1 is what the founding fathers fought against. Straight from the U.N. Agenda 21’s playbook, SB1 will give power to a county to form a “Sustainable Communities Investment Authority” (SCIA). These Authorities have the power of eminent domain and can confiscate private property to build “sustainable communities.” The bill essentially paves the way for the loss of any true private property in California, resulting in the loss of freedom and driving down home values. If the Senate passes the modified bill, only Governor Jerry Brown (D – CA) will stand in its way of becoming law.
This means that city and county governments can create unelected bureaucracies with the power to do what’s necessary to create “sustainable communities.” It also means that the definition of “blight” will change from the original definition of abandoned and decaying buildings on residential lots to a much wider definition including anything the bureaucracies need to create sustainable communities.”
Activist Susan Olsen and NH State Rep Jane Cormier recorded a good solid radio show on the problems with the NH Regional Planning Commissions on the December 27th edition of WTPL 107.7 “The Pulse” while sitting in for Brian “Bulldog” Tilton.
They hear from noted activists Tim Carter, Ken Eyring, Skip Murphy, and Jane Aitken who call in to talk about how this issue is being brought to the attention of legislators and voters.
RPCs were created in 1969 by RSA 36 but voters feel that they have gone far beyond their purview by becoming lobbyists for the federal government, which by the way, should be illegal according to NH statutes.
RPCs have noticed activity and have stepped up their propaganda machine with communications and lobbying to the NH legislature, using our tax money of course.
When bills come up for scrutiny before committees you can be sure their representatives will be there. This means we need to be there as well.
Most legislators don’t even know what RPCs are about or what they do. Proof of this is in the email one legislator wrote to GSFs stating that he wasn’t concerned about what the RPCs were doing because after all, we “elected these folks to make decisions for us”. Trouble is, we didn’t. And as caller Dave from Weare stated, legislators need to be aware of just who is calling them to lobby for the federal government and we need to watch what deals come to these legislators as a result of these regional projects.
She has filed a bill in the NH legislature to abolish RPCs.
“She said that sheer number of references to the regional planning commissions in state statute belies the notion that they have only advisory authority.”
“All of those repeals,” she said. “How advisory is that?” That the commissions can be replaced by two planners at OEP, she said confirms that “municipalities will do just fine without the bloated bureaucracy,” which she described as “basically a money laundering thing.”
“The fight is on,” Cormier declared, “and we’re going for broke.”
“Corridors of the Future is a Federal Highway Administration program to select key interstate highway routes for massive expansion. These projects are related to the NAFTA Superhighway program, and several of the proposals would be similar to the Trans Texas Corridor highway design — massive widening of interstate highways and/or new highway routes with parallel truck only lanes to facilitate huge increases in truck traffic between Mexico, the US and Canada.”
