Be careful what you write in emails…big brother is watching.
Tag Archives: EPA
PLEASE watch this video. This is a textbook example of how Sustainable Development is being forced ALL over this country. How many folks has this happened to already that were not as courageous as the Sackett’s and therefore we never heard about it?
What will you do when the EPA declares your land a “wetland”? By crawlspace floods a little when it rains…is my land within the city limits a wetland? And at best the ruling by the Supreme Court is only a partial victory for property rights.
ATF trying to make shotguns illegal…Federal taxes funding ICLEI, and other sutainable development news
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”
Thomas Jefferson Papers
Having the ATF use craftily worded regulations that “re-define” what a shotgun is or is not, is the same as using the EPA to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. The 2nd Amendment stays on the books, yet citizens end up with no weapons to defend themselves.
Some of those in the Rutherford 912, Caldwell, and Shelby Tea Parties may remember this map from my Agenda 21 presentation:
Remember the “red” areas are where people cannot be. There was a great post from Gold County Patriots in California about how Wildlands Funding was taken out of the latest John Boehner “Continuing Resolution” funding bill. Click here to read.
However, also in that same Continuing Resolution bill Congress continued comprehensive funding for the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, aka Smart Growth America. Click here to read Smart Growth America’s press release.
Finally it is official, we are ALL funding ICLEI!
The following is pasted from an email from a group everyone concerned with Agenda 21, and sustainable development, should receive updates from called Freedom 21. They have a multitude of great resources to educate yourself and others about how UN front groups use backdoor strategies to further accelerate Agenda 21 in all our communities.
We’re funding ICLEI!
Who would have thought that the federal government would be funding ICLEI? We have just acquired audit reports by the federal government for 2007 and 2008 grants issued to ICLEI.
The 2007 report shows ICLEI received $1,774,346.
The 2008 report shows ICLEI received $1,053,056.
ICLEI collects membership fees from nearly 600 American communities as well as consultation fees for special services they may perform. Why do they deserve to get our tax dollars in the form of grants?
This is a question you may wish to ask your city councilmen and/or your county commissioners and your congressmen.
Print these reports and have them in hand when you oppose your community’s joining ICLEI. Las Cruces, NM; Titusville, FL; Cleveland, TN; and other communities now fighting this battle may gain some ground if your officials know that ICLEI is double-dipping – getting tax dollars from your city/county and the federal government.
Good video from Tom DeWeese about new water rationing regulations for local municipalities being introduced by the UN.
As expected Senate allows the runaway freight train, aka the EPA, to continue their assualt on our liberty.
Will the House step up, and defund the EPA behemoth, I doubt it. But now the House is the only body left to prevent the EPA from accomplishing through executive power, what Obama described during his campaign, as energy prices “necessarily skyrocketing”.
Rep McHenry assured the attendees of the Cleveland County GOP convention last month that he strongly opposes Obama’s Energy Doctrine which seems to include ALL forms of energy, as long as they are Wind and Solar.
Only time will tell if The House truly has the guts to reign in an out of control EPA.
04/07/2011 11:21 AM
EPA Authority Survives Senate Test
The US Senate on Wednesday rejected a series of amendments that would have blocked or delayed greenhouse gas regulations established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The vote split evenly (50-50) on the Republican-backed amendment that would have permanently stripped the EPA of its authority to limit greenhouse gas emissions and veto the agency’s scientific finding that climate change threatens public health and wellfare.
The amendment needed 60 votes to pass.
Four Democrats joined with Republicans in supporting the amendment–Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.
Other amendments addressing the EPA’s authority also failed to gain votes.
The amendment offered by Democrat Max Baucus to exempt agriculture and small businesses from climate rules gained only 7 votes, after meeting with opposition from the agriculture lobby and environmentalists.
Two separate amendments would have delayed EPA regulations by two years. The first, introduced by Democrat Debbie Stabenow also would have prevented California from setting tougher emissions standards, while shielding agriculture from regulations. That amendment fell 7-93.
West Virginia Democrate Jay Rockefeller finally got a floor vote on his amendment to delay regulations. He pushed for the legislation last year, stating that he had strong Republican support. But since then, Republicans increased their ambitions to weaken the EPA, and Rockefellers amendment received only 12 “yes” votes to 88 “no” votes.
The votes are a victory for the EPA and the White House, which is following through on its promise to regulate greenhouse gas emissions after Congress failed to pass climate legislation last year.
The Republican-controlled House of Representatives is still expected to pass a bill to block the EPA, but that vote would be only symbolic, as the Senate’s intentions are now clear, and the White House has said it would veto any such bill.
But it should be noted that 17 Democrats voted to restrict the EPA to some degree–a sign that the EPA, unfortunately, remains on thin ice.
Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.
During my talk to the Shelby 912 Group I mentioned how the University of North Carolina host’s an internet listserv called GreenGov which allows for an extraordinary level of coordination and communication for bureaucrats within the NC governmental system concerning sustainable development projects. The particular example I cited in my talk demonstrated how NCDENR was using the listserv to promote an EPA program.
The example below clearly shows how ICLEI has now also been given access to the UNC ListServ to promote the fact they have been chosen by the Department of Energy to help NC communities go solar.
GREENGOV Digest for Friday, March 18, 2011.
Subject: WORKSHOP – Getting Started with Solar in Your Community”
From: “Cyrus Bhedwar” email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 13:10:03 -0400
Solar America Communities Workshop at SOLAR 2011
Register now for the Solar America Communities workshop at SOLAR 2011! The
free workshop, “Getting Started with Solar in Your Community,” will take
place from 8am-4pm on Tuesday, May 17th in Raleigh, NC.
The workshop will focus on important concepts related to residential and
commercial solar installations and how to create a local-level solar program
and install solar on municipal and other community facilities. In the
afternoon, you will network with industry representatives to explore the
development of solar projects.
The workshop has four central objectives:
* Develop a common vocabulary and understanding of solar technologies
* Examine the benefits of and barriers to solar installations in local
* Learn what steps a community can take to go solar
* Find out where to go for more information on a range of topics, including
technologies, installation, and financing
To register for the free workshop, contact Anna Read at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Solar America Communities is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) program
designed to increase the use and integration of solar energy in communities
across the United States. The International City/County Management
Association and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA were selected
by DOE to assist local governments throughout the U.S. implement best
practices and accelerate the adoption of solar energy.
It is also NOT a coincidence that Cyrus is involved…Gaspee reported months ago that Atlanta has been chosen as one of the 9 “beta” cities for the STAR guidelines to be implemented. And don’t forget, SEQL which Cleveland County and Shelby are members of, links to ICLEI on their website!
Are Cleveland County’s elected officials aware of the consequences of the continued support of Sustainable Development in our county?
Glossary of Terms for Cleveland County Land Use Plan:
Centralina Council of Governments (CCOG)
Isothermal Planning and Development Commission (IPDC)
Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life (SEQL)
Lake Norman Rural Planning Organization(LNRPO)
Cleveland County Transportation Partnership (CCTP)
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
Cleveland County Chamber of Commerce (COC)
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
I’m sure at this point most of us have heard the often quoted phrase, “10% unemployment is the new normal”. I was not able to find anyone who actually said those exact words, however I did find one statement in my view that is close enough. In October of 2010 Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, speaking at the 7th World Business Forum, stated “Even if the U.S. economy manages to grow, it will be too slow to provide enough jobs needed and a high unemployment rate will be a new normal for Americans”.
Cleveland County’s unemployment today is somewhere between 11-12%. I submit our current Land Use Plan is a contributing factor to our continued high unemployment rate. Why… because it clearly tells industry to KEEP OUT of Cleveland County. It actually states that “light” industry is preferred over “heavy” industry, because “heavy” industry is considered bad for the environment. Commissioner Falls stated at the Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting that NO OTHER DOCUMENT is referenced more in the minutes of the Commissioner’s meetings than the Cleveland County Land Use Plan of 2005. It is also important to note that Bill Dustin, a Centralina Council of Governments official, was summoned to Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting in order for the Board to officially notify Centralina that it is time to adjust the current version of the Land Use Plan. Ironically, the Shelby Star article that reported about the Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting did not mention the Land Use Plan, or Centalina Council of Governments at all. Hmmm. Click here to see The Star article.
My first guess is, most Cleveland County residents are like I was a couple of months ago… “Cleveland County has a Land Use Plan, what’s a Land Use Plan?”
Yes we do. And it puts Cleveland County on a path of “Sustainable Development” that looks very much like that of the United Nations’ version of Sustainable Development. A plan that puts a sizable impediment on Cleveland County’s growth. Because growth is well…unsustainable. As John W. Frece, Director of Smart Growth Program Development, Community and Environment Division, EPA puts it, state and local governments managing growth is always contentious. Mr. Frece says managing growth always ”pits individual rights vs. the collective good, freedom vs. governmental control, and communal benefits vs. individual benefits.” I think if you will take the time to read it yourself you will agree the current Land Use Plan certainly does those things.
My second guess is that our County Commissioners do not fully realize the true consequences of following a Land Use Plan that is written to support the “Sustainable Development” agenda. And in conjunction with new state law that formed a Sustainable Communities Task Force, Cleveland County and North Carolina are quickly heading down a ”democratic” path, that will continue to put more and more control of our lives into the hands of the trillion headed hydra leviathan that is our Federal Government.
What is Centralina Council of Governments? It is an entity created by NC Statute in 1972. Click here to read about the creation of the Councils in North Carolina. Interestingly, according to the NC Statute, Cleveland County is NOT a member of Centralina. We are a member of Isothermal Planning and Development Commission.
Nonetheless, the Land Use Plan as it is currently written shares some of the same terminology and goals of the Sustainable Development agenda being promoted by a group called ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability. In fact, I would encourage the reader to print the ICLEI STAR Community Index Guidelines and compare them to the LUP and see the similarities for yourself. Bear in mind, funding and content for the ICLEI Star guidelines came from George Soros funded organizations like the Apollo Alliance and the Center for American Progress. Other contributing organizations were the AFL/CIO and Federal Agencies like the EPA. Click here to download and read the STAR Guidelines.
Now Centralina Council of Governments apparently does much more than simply create land use plans. They seem to also be in the business of “administering” other groups as well. A good example is Sustainable Development for Quality of Life, or SEQL.
In 2005 both Cleveland County and the City of Shelby, “joined” SEQL. Pages 8-9 of the LUP details Cleveland County’s joining SEQL. Shelby joined SEQL with RESOLUTION NO. 7-2005
A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAM.
This is quoted directly from the Land Use Plan:
“Cleveland County has joined SEQL (Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life) an integrated strategy for local governments to address air quality, water resource, and sustainable growth issues. SEQL is funded, in part, by the USEPA and is administered by Centralina COG. By being a SEQL partner, Cleveland County pledges to undertake actions that will help promote environmentally sound policies”
Notice SEQL’s funding is provided by the EPA, and they are “adminstered by” CCOG.
If you still have doubts about SEQL’s definition of “sustainability”, visit the ”links” section of their website. SEQL links to ICLEI, EPA, DOE, and other sites like Car Free.com, click here to see.
Is it reasonable to say that Cleveland County, and Shelby, have in essence asked the EPA to write our Land Use Plan?
So how would the EPA ask us to use our land?
There is one thing for sure, they want a lot of bicycle, pedestrian, and “open” spaces. Bicycle and pedestrian paths are discussed on five pages each. The Land Use Plan states that Cleveland County communities should be “walkable” in nature, and that
“Multi-family development may be appropriate along the US 74 Corridor where it may be a form of transit-oriented development.”
Car Free’s website tag line says:
“Carfree Cities and Carfree Design Manual proposea delightful solution to the vexing problem of urban automobiles.”
So I guess “transit-oriented” development must mean putting housing near bike paths, sidewalks etc. because urban automobiles will be eliminated. Or maybe… they mean building housing near the commuter rail lines that the County Commissioners are currently discussing with NCDOT and Lake Norman RPO.
Oh let me make my third guess, you have not heard of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan either. Well do not feel bad. When Lake Norman RPO travelled all over the county educating Cleveland County residents at public meetings about the CTP, only 11 people signed in as having participated in two separate meetings in Lawndale and Shelby. I have no doubt that more than 11 people participated, but even if 100 people attended each meeting, it would still only represent .2% of the population of Cleveland County.
What is Lake Norman RPO? Once again it is an entity created by the NC Legislature. RPO stands for Rural Planning Organization. Click here to see their website. You can read the history behind RPO’s in NC here on NCDOT’s website. The site states:
“In 2000, the State of North Carolina recognized the need for transportation planning in rural North Carolina areas not within an MPO by enacting Chapter 136, Article 17, Section 136-210-213 of the General Statutes. This provided for the development of Rural Planning Organizations (RPO). There are 20 Rural Planning Organizations in the State.”
By law municipalities do not have to be members of their local RPO but counties do. By law Cleveland County is a member of Lake Norman RPO, we also pay yearly dues to the organization.
Lake Norman RPO is also “administered” by Centralina COG.
In a nutshell, not only does the CTP include the infamous Shelby Bypass, and many other road expansions and road “diets”, but it also includes (approx.) a 50 mile Bus Route, 50 miles of rail, and almost a 100 miles each of bicycle and pedestrian paths! And Lake Norman RPO/Centralina COG/NCDOT is pressuring our Commissioner’s to approve this plan. In the Feb 1st Commissioner’s meeting the CTP was tabled by the Commissioner’s. The Shelby Star did not report about that either. It is supposed to be discussed more fully in the Feb 24th Commissioer’s working session. Click the CTP link below to see Lake Norman RPO/NCDOT proposed maps for the pedestrian, bicycle, bus, and rail lines.
I am sure it is just a weird coincidence that ICLEI’s STAR Guidelines state under the HOUSING section:
[sustainable communities] Foster the preservation, construction and maintenance of an adequate supply of healthful, affordable, resource-efficient, and inclusive housing. Residential development should be available to all ages, abilities, incomes, and household sizes and be located in environmentally safe areas near public transportation…
AND our LUP calls for compact walkable communities, and transit-oriented [residential] development,
AND our CTP calls for BUS, pedestrian, Bicycle, and Rail lines right?
If you believe that, I have some beachfront property I want to sell you located in Asheville. Centralina has also informed our Commissioners that most of the CTP is unfunded at this point, but that they should approve it anyway.
It is my sincere hope that my fellow citizen’s of Cleveland County will begin making their presence felt at the Commissioner’s meetings, and that they will make their voices heard about an LUP that places “sustainable growth” ahead of economic growth.
Weekly Digest: Water Control in NC, NCDENR working with EPA, NC city and state representatives discuss the U.S.-China EcoPartnerships program with the Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs, and Duke Energy collaborates with China’s biggest energy provider
Who controls your Water usage in NC?
If you are a regular reader of the Gaspee you may have already seen this video. However, if you have not, it is vital you watch this video first. In the first few minutes of this video sustainability expert, Andrew Winston, admits that Climate Change Science has been downgraded to more theory than science. However, in his very next breath he claims we are in store for a world wide water shortage armegeddon! Later in the video he quotes the CEO of Duke Energy talking about sustainability in the corporate world . This video truly gives you a great 30,000 ft. view of the sustainability agenda and how vast it has already spread in the US.
State, and Local water “shortages” will be the next “emergency” that the globalists, posing as sustainabilists, will not let go to waste in NC. Once again I will try my best to show you where to connect the dots but YOU will have to do the work. All the key players from the Feds, coordinating with Raleigh, are poised to swoop in and declare a drought emergency, and use it to do God Only Knows what.
This tale begins with a news release about an impending NC drought from NCDENR.
Before you read the news release it is important for you to first recognize the role of NCDENR (still controlled by the Executive Branch of NC) in the sustainable development agenda in NC. In SB 897 NCDENR has been legally charged for the ”redevelopment of the State’s communities in a sustainable manner”. Section 13.5 of SB 897 states:
“§ 143B-344.34 creates the North Carolina Sustainable Communities Task Force
(a) The General Assembly finds that the rapid growth of the urban and suburban areas of North Carolina and the economic challenges facing many of the State’s urban cores, rural areas, and smaller communities create a significant need for the strategic use of resources to plan and accommodate healthy and equitable development without compromising natural systems and the needs of future generations of North Carolinians.
(b) The General Assembly finds that the following principles describe sustainable development for North Carolina’s communities:
(1) Better transportation choices. – Offering safe, reliable, and economical motorized and nonmotorized transportation options to decrease household transportation costs
Equitable, affordable housing. – Encouraging the provision to North Carolina citizens of all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities expanded location-, water-, and energy-efficient housing choices that increase mobility, decrease the impact on existing water and energy infrastructure, and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation.
(4) Support of existing communities. – Targeting public funds toward existing communities that are using strategies such as transit-oriented, mixed-use development, and land recycling to increase community revitalization, enhance the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of public works investments, and protect rural landscapes.
Recognize and support communities and neighborhoods. – Preserving and enhancing the unique characteristics of rural, urban, and suburban communities by investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods.
There is created within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources the North Carolina Sustainable Communities Task Force to lead and support the State’s sustainable communities initiatives. The duties of the Task Force shall be as follows:
(2) To promote regional partnerships and to assist local governments and regional or interlocal organizations in North Carolina in seeking and managing funding from federal, public, or private initiatives, grant programs, or donors related to the planning, development, or redevelopment of the State’s communities in a sustainable manner.
Now read the NCDENR drought news release. Click HERE.
The news release mentions a public/private group called the Drought Advisory Management Council.
I say public/private because it contains Federal agencies, State agencies, and the University of Nebraska’s Drought Mitigation Center. The Drought Advisory Council also has a .ORG at the end of their website not a .GOV.
This deliberate tangling of governmental and private interests is particularly dangerous because any recommendations for water usage at the state or county level the council makes, based on “data” from the University, is NOT subject to Freedom of Information Act. This council, and the NC Laws that empower it, is a small nudge designed to take more power away from We The People.
Click here to see the Drought Advisory Council’s website.
The following is from the About Us section of the Drought Advisory Management Council:
“The North Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council that originated in 1992 was given official statutory status and assigned the responsibility for issuing drought advisories in 2003. The drought advisories provide accurate and consistent information to assist local governments and other water users in taking appropriate drought response actions in specific areas of the state that are exhibiting impending or existing drought conditions.
The Drought Monitoring Council was an interagency coordination and information exchange body created in 1992. In 2002, the council did a creditable job monitoring and coordinating drought responses, while increasing public awareness of the council’s function and effectiveness. The General Assembly recognized the Drought Monitoring Council’s leadership and performance by giving them an official statutory base and changed its name to the Drought Management Advisory Council (DMAC) to reflect the broader role of the council, which extends beyond monitoring drought conditions.
On July 17, 2003, North Carolina General Statute 143.355.1 was ratified to assign the DMAC an important new role, which became evident in 2002. A number of local governments indicated that it would be helpful to have official, objective drought status advisories to give them a reliable basis for their management responses. The new statute assigned this new advisory role to the DMAC and also specified that drought advisories are to be based on technical data to address varying conditions throughout the state. The new system avoids the problems that some states have experienced in declaring drought warnings statewide, when conditions did not warrant it in all regions of the state, by tailoring advisories to local conditions. When determining the issuance of a drought advisory, the Council takes into account stream flows, ground water levels, the amount of water stored in reservoirs, weather forecasts, the time of year, and other relevant factors for assessing the location and severity of drought conditions.
The intent of the new statute is for the DMAC to continue with essentially the same membership and functions that the Drought Monitoring Council previously exercised, but with new statutory authority and a new responsibility for providing a system of localized drought assessment and to issue advisories when needed. Importantly, the operation of the DMAC continues to carry on the same role as the Drought Monitoring Council did in support of the North Carolina Emergency Operations Plan and the activation of the Drought Assessment and Response Plan.
The General Assembly amended the statute in 2004, requiring the Council to submit an activities report to the Secretary, the Governor, and the Environmental Review Commission by October 1st of each year. The report includes a review of drought advisories issued by the Council and any recommendations to improve coordination among local, State, and federal agencies; public water systems; and water users. The purpose of the report is to continue to identify areas for improving the management and mitigation of the harmful effects of drought. (2003-387, s. 2; 2004-195, s. 2.5)
An act to improve drought preparedness and response in North Carolina as recommended by the Environmental Review Commission was signed into law by Gov. Mike Easley on July 31, 2008. Drought Legislation, Section 16 of Session Law 2008-143 included added detail about members and participants in the work of the DMAC The Representatives designated to serve on the Council will have expertise or responsibility in meteorology, ground water and surface water hydrology, water system operation and management, reservoir management, emergency response, or another subject area related to assessment and management of drought impacts. Other agencies and organizations may be invited that represent water users, including local governments, agriculture, agribusiness, forestry, manufacturing, investor-owned water utilities regulated by the North Carolina Utilities Commission, and others as appropriate to participate in the work of the Council with respect to particular drought related issues.
Organizations invited to serve on the Council include:
- NC Cooperative Extension Service
- State Climate Office at North Carolina State University
- NC Public Staff of the Utilities Commission
- NC Wildlife Resources Commission
- NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
- NC Department of Commerce
- NC Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
- US National Weather Service, NOAA
- US Geological Survey
- US Army Corps of Engineers
- US Department of Agriculture
- Federal Emergency Management Agency, US Department of Homeland Security <!–
- Other agencies and organizations that represent water users, including local governments, agriculture, agribusiness, forestry, manufacturing, and others, as appropriate, to designate a representative to serve on the Council or to participate in the work of the Council with respect to particular drought related issues
The Chair of the Council is an employee of DENR designated by the Department. The Council is required to meet at least once in each calendar year in order to maintain appropriate agency readiness and participation. In addition, the Council will meet on the call of the Chair to respond to drought conditions.
A main purpose of the DMAC is to provide consistent and accurate information on drought conditions in the state to the U.S. Drought Monitor, the Environmental Management Commission, the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Environmental Review Commission, and the public.
In the matter of DMAC issuing drought classification and response actions by county, SL 2008-143 requires that if the U.S. Drought Monitor of North Carolina shows more than one drought designation in a county, the drought classification for the county is the highest drought designation that applies to at least twenty five percent (25%) of the land area of the county. Drought response actions are based on the drought classification for each county within a drought area that is listed each Thursday on the DMAC Website.
The law states that the council may recommend to the secretary a drought designation for a county that is different from the designation based on the U.S. Drought Monitor of North Carolina if the depiction of drought does not accurately reflect localized conditions. In recommending a drought designation that differs from the U.S. Drought Monitor designation, the council will consider stream flows, ground water levels, the amount of water stored in reservoirs, weather forecasts, the time of year and other factors that are relevant to determining the location and severity of drought conditions.”
Did you catch the Federal Agencies involved?
USDA, NOAA, USGS, and Homeland Security? Why is Homeland Security involved at all, in ANY desicion making process related to drought conditions in NC ?
If you visit the US Department of States Sustainable Development Partnerships website (click here) you will see that USDA, NOAA, and USGS are major Ferderal players in the sustainable agenda.
Also NOAA, US Department of Energy, EPA, and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were also major contributors to the ICLEI/STAR guidelines.
Below is a candid video of an NOAA scientist publically calling for population reduction, a major theme of sustainable development, in the US and the world, and “empowering women to not have children by providing them birth control”.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
today announced the formation of Sustainable
Communities Building Blocks
I picked this story up from the Green Gov list serve, managed by the UNC System. Green Gov is used frequently by ICLEI to coordinate efforts amoung NC cities on sustainable initiatives. Notice at the end the contact info for the Program Director of the Sustainable Communities Initiative, Office of Conservation, Planning & Community Affairs, North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources is listed. I assume that means he posted this story to the Green Gov UNC List Serv.
Release date: 02/03/2011
Contact Information: Richard Yost, email@example.com, 202-564-7827, 202-564-4355
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced the formation of Sustainable Communities Building Blocks, a program designed to help interested communities adopt sustainable planning methods. Sustainable planning helps safeguard the environment and spur economic development while also improving Americans’ health. Interested communities are invited to apply to receive technical assistance during a day-long session that will help them achieve their sustainable planning goals. The application period opens on February 3 and ends on February 23, 2011.
“We’re pleased to be part of this program to help communities build vibrant, healthy neighborhoods where families want to live and businesses want to invest and grow,” EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe said. “Through this program, we’ll walk communities through the process of making smart, cost-effective investments by helping them navigate existing tools vital to securing a lasting foundation for prosperity.”
EPA will work with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to select 20 participating communities through a competitive process. During the day-long session, participants will explore proven sustainability tools, including zoning code reviews, walkability assessments, parking policy analysis, climate action planning, and commuter benefits. Each community will select a specific tool to focus on and also learn about general smart growth development strategies.
Sustainable Communities Building Blocks is being coordinated through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a joint effort between the EPA, HUD, and DOT to coordinate federal actions on housing, transportation, and environmental protection. This interagency collaboration achieves efficient federal investments in infrastructure, facilities, and services that meet multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives.
More information and submission instructions for the Sustainable Communities Building Blocks Program: http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/buildingblocks.htm
More information on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities:http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/index.html
Brian Byfield, AICP
Sustainable Communities Initiative
Office of Conservation, Planning & Community Affairs
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources
p: 919 715 7691
f: 919 715 3060
NC city and state representatives discuss the U.S.-
China EcoPartnerships program with the Bureau of
Oceans and International Environment and Scientific
Clicke here for article.
“On Monday, January 31, I co-hosted with the office of the Special Envoy for Climate Change (S/SECC) and the Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs (OES) over fifty energy, environment and climate officers, as well as representatives of their professional organizations, for a post-Cancun conversation about climate change. Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change Dr. Jonathan Pershing served as the distinguished speaker. Representatives from state and city governments from California, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington D.C., and Wisconsin joined us in the dialogue. Organizations of elected state and local officials — such as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), the National League of Cities (NLC), and Sister Cities International (SCI) — engaged in the conversation. Policy specialists from the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS), the Georgetown Climate Center (GCC), and the U.S. Green Building Council (GBC) shared global and local perspectives. Eric Maltzer from OES shared information about the U.S.-China EcoPartnerships program.”
Duke Energy and China’s ENN Group Collaborate on
Green Cities Initiative
Fantastic! I guess if they own 25% of our debt they get to have a say in the US’s energy usage.
I am encouraging my in and out of state readers, if you have not already, begin focusing very closley to what your state capitals are doing. I believe God’s divine intervention, and the power vested in the States within the 10th Amendement, are are only hope of irradicating this political agenda.
In October of 2010 Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, speaking at the 7th World Business Forum, stated ”Even if the U.S. economy manages to grow, it will be too slow to provide enough jobs needed and a high unemployment rate will be a new normal for Americans”. (Click here to read source)
In a previous post (click here to read) detailing how the LeGrand Conference Center, and the new Shelby Middle School are being constructed using Federal Stimulus money, Gaspee quoted County Manager David Dear:
“The county unemployment rate is currently 14.3%. Retail sales have continued to decline and local housing starts are currently very depressed. Despite declining revenues, this budget focuses on maintaining overall public expenditures at current levels.” (Click here to read)
Cleveland County’s unemployment is 14%… the new normal is “High” unemployment for Americans…really? I’m NOT ok with that.
Gaspee interviewed Jason Falls, newly elected Cleveland County Commissioner, and Commissioner Falls made no bones about the need he sees for economic and job growth in Cleveland County. So what’s holding our county back? Why aren’t we growing?
At 14% unemployment, is ANY idea off the table?
The answer is yes. Cleveland County leadership, at least since 2005, is only interested in “sustainable growth.”
In 2005 42 of Cleveland County’s community leaders, including business and government, signed on to the UN’s agenda of “Sustainable Development“. I know that sounds wildly unbelievable, but I implore the reader to continue before you dismiss me out of hand.
According to the Cleveland County Land Use Plan of 2005 Cleveland County became a member of an EPA funded program called Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life or SEQL. This is from the About Section of SEQL’s website (click here to read)
“SEQL is an integrated environmental initiative for the 15-county metropolitan Charlotte region in North and South Carolina.
SEQL involves elected officials, local government staffs, business and industry groups, economic development groups and environmental stakeholder groups working together toward viable solutions to regional growth.
SEQL is regional in its vision and influence, but local in application.
SEQL promotes implementation of specific Action Items on Air Quality, Sustainable Growth and Water Resources and consideration of environmental impacts in decision-making at local and regional levels.
SEQL is funded by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Centralina Council of Governments in cooperation with Catawba Regional Council of Governments.”
The EPA and SEQL knew local elected officials would never sign on to something with “sustainable development” or EPA, in the title even in 2005. So SEQL cleverly “laundered their EPA funding” by setting up Centralina Council of Governments. Centralina Council of Governments then assists government and business leaders in Cleveland County to create the Cleveland County Land Use Plan, published on April 19th, 2005. (Click here to download)
Before we go further please make note of this. Gaspee recently posted on a very significant declaration that came out of the latest United Nations climate summit held in Cancun.
Martin Chavez, the Executive Director of ICLEI stated:
“For the first time in the history of climate negotiations, the United Nations has officially recognized the crucial roles of local governments in fighting climate change – as local governments are now identified by delegate nations as “government stakeholders”. (Click here to read post)
Note that SEQL , and ICLEI also use the term, Stakeholder. That is a very popular term within the UN’s sustainability agenda.
And that is only the first of MANY similarities between SEQL, ICLEI, the United Nations Agenda 21, AND Cleveland County’s Land Use Plan. Please print both and compare them for yourselves.
ICLEI-STAR Sustainable Community’s Index (click here)
Cleveland County Land Use Plan (click here)
On a separate note…does the Cancun declaration potentially mean that Shelby City Council members or County Commissioners could go and participate in official UN proceedings without the consent of our State or Federal legislature? Gaspee will save that for another story.
There are a few parts of the Cleveland County Land Use Plan that make good sence, however for the most part, it reads like an economy killing manifesto written by Al Gore.
In my brief reading of the Land Use Plan Open Space is discussed on 12 different pages. I enjoy Crowder’s Mountain as much as anyone, but bear in mind that for every OPEN space, there is one less JOB space. Bicycles and sidewalk space are discussed on five pages each, and coincidentally I’m sure, people riding bicycles and walking on sidewalks are on the cover of ICLEI’s STAR Guidelines. Housing built around mass transit are discussed in both. The Land Use Plan also states Cleveland County communities should be “walkable” in nature just as ICLEI’s STAR Guidelines mandate.
Here are the ISSUES facing Cleveland County as defined by the 42 author’s of the Land Use Plan:
STEERING COMMITTEE ISSUES OF CONCERN
ISSUE 1. RURAL CHARACTER
Cleveland County residents value their rural lifestyles, their views, and their green space, and DON’T want to lose them.
Maintain lower-density residential development.
Keep the “rural” feel of the community—protect viewsheds and ensure that new development fits with older.
Limit industrial or commercial growth to existing towns or major corridors—but preserve the sense that one has “arrived” in a town by not having continuous development from town to town.
Include some type of design guidelines for commercial development to ensure that it “fits in” with its surroundings.
Green and open space is critical—preserve it in any new housing developments. Viewsheds should be preserved by buffering.
ISSUE 2. CITIES, TOWNS, AND VILLAGES
Development should occur FIRST in existing cities, towns, and villages.
A healthy mix of uses should be encouraged—people should be able to “live over the store.” Mixed use can work in any community if it’s designed properly.
More urbanized areas should be walkable and connected—especially in communities with water and sewer.
Sidewalks are a must in more urbanized areas, and in new subdivisions in towns.
Multi-family development is appropriate for all communities if it’s in an area with water/sewer and is designed to fit in with the environs.
Parks, greenways, trails, and civic space should be included in urban and village planning.
Our towns and villages should not be simply extensions of highway sprawl, but should have identifiable “gateways” or perhaps even greenbelts.
Commercial development should have a sense of permanency—it should not look “thrown together” or “temporary”. It SHOULD fit in with the image we want our community to project.
Traditional “strip” development is not preferred, but development that shares driveways is a possibility IF the development is well designed.
Commercial development should not be “strung out” along the highway but clustered in nodes around major intersections.
Provide some type of proposal to handle big-box stores—either a plan to handle their abandonment or incentives to re-use them.
Signage should be better regulated.
Consideration should be given to regulating outdoor lighting so that it lights what it’s meant to, but doesn’t create “light pollution.”
Areas suggested for industrial growth include:
The I-85 Corridor
The Highway 18 Corridor
The Kings Mountain/Shelby Corridor
At selected sites along the new Shelby Bypass Grover
The residents of Grover are particularly interested in redevelopment rather than greenfields sites.
Infrastructural improvements designed to facilitate industrial recruitment should be actively investigated and implemented. [As long as it is LIGHT Industrial, read further down]
Industrial development should be sufficiently buffered, landscaped, and otherwise regulated so that it does not negatively impact adjoining uses.
Light industry is preferred over heavy industry, which is perceived as being bad for the environment.
In Upper Cleveland County, the preference for industrial uses is for smaller, low-traffic type uses rather than one or two major employers. In Upper Cleveland County, buffering is particularly important.
The one place in Upper Cleveland County where commercial/industrial development should perhaps be encouraged is along NC18 between Fallston and Belwood.
There is a sense that residents would rather not have smaller (10-15 home) subdivisions on cul-de-sacs that are one-way-in/one-way-out and spaced out along the highway—they would rather have larger (or even small) developments that are connected to the fabric of the community.
Residential development in all areas of the county ideally should reflect its context—in rural areas, that may mean that larger, non-“family” development is buffered so that rural viewsheds are retained.
Multi-family development should take place in city, town, or village centers, and not in rural areas (where there is no sewer to support it).
Multi-family development may be appropriate along the US 74 Corridor where it may be a form of transit-oriented development.
Manufactured housing will probably always be with us as a form of affordable housing.
OPEN SPACE AND GREENWAYS
There is a need for a greenway network in Cleveland County.
Open space and rural landscapes must be preserved.
Civic open space is important—parks, trails, greenways, etc.
Regulations that control clear-cutting are needed.
A Countywide open space plan should be created.
Since sewer treatment plants encourage development, careful attention must be given to where they go.
NC 18 is a potential corridor to link to I-40 and it should be planned—in accordance with the caveats listed above for rural character, commercial, and industrial development.
Upper Cleveland County should keep its two-lane road network so that additional development isn’t encouraged—although the roads should be made safer with wider shoulders, etc.
One-way-in/one-way-out residential and commercial development is not desirable.
Connectivity is preferred, where feasible.
Code enforcement is an issue now, and added regulations will increase the perceived enforcement gap.
Commercial properties need code enforcement just as much as residential properties do.
Government should provide sufficient resources to meet the code enforcement needs.
Conditional use zoning is needed to give the County better control on how development takes place.
Now I do not claim to be an expert when it comes to “town planning” however, does this plan send a message to potential companies wanting to relocate that Cleveland County covets them, or does it say KEEP OUT?
We now know that NCDENR has adopted (click here to read) the UN’s version of sustainable development. We now know that Cleveland County is a member of the EPA funded SEQL, and SEQL has links on their website to ICLEI and LA21, or Local Agenda 21 (click here to see). And we now know that SB 897 created the Sustainable Communities Task Force, and that NCDENR, listed as a partner to SEQL as well, will be the State agency that will drive the “sustainability agenda” in North Carolina.
My question is simple:
HAS CLEVELAND COUNTY ADOPTED THE UNITED NATIONS VERSION OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL?
To my freedom loving neighbor’s in other states, please investigate to see if your town has submitted a similar land use plan, to a similar EPA front group in your region.
To my freedom loving neighbors in Cleveland County; have powerful interests been hindering growth in our county, based on the biggest scientific hoax of modern times?
If so what are WE prepared to do about it?
The Research Triangle Regional Partnership is hosting
“A Green Future for Economic Development: The Dollars and Sense of Open Space,” will be held 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the McKimmon Center at N.C. State University.
Keynote addresses by national experts in linking open space planning for economic development: Edward T. McMahon, senior resident fellow and Charles E. Fraser Chair for Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy at the Urban Land Institute, an expert in open space planning to promote economic growth. Urban Land Institute is also a major contributor to ICLEI’s STAR guidelines.
More “open” spaces is less space for your house and mine. Don’t worry though just like in Dubai, India when they bulldozed houses of the poor people because they needed the land to build mass transit systems, the Government bought them all new “compact” housing. More to come on that story. Or if open spaces do not interest me maybe I could go take a class on how to “privatize” my town’s water supply. You will even learn here how to create propaganda that will cover up what you are doing to the voters! What a value.
The University of North Carolina’s Environmental Finance Center is hosting “Water and Wastewater Funding Strategies workshop.” It will provide utility practitioners with new skills and up-to-date information on infrastructure finance planning strategies and funding resources. This workshop is a part of the EFC’s Water Management Leadership Program.
Workshop topics include:
- Update on public state and federal programs including Stimulus Infrastructure Funding
- Crafting inter-local infrastructure agreements and partnerships
- Pricing and infrastructure fee options
- Case studies of successful capital finance planning
- Private finance options and trends
- Methods for successfully presenting information to funding sources, the public and elected officials
Or if neither one of those float your boat, you could attend NC Department of the Environment and Natural Resources Division of Environmental Assistance and Outreach’s workshop on the exciting topic of food diversion in NC. The state of North Carolina adopted the EPA’s Food Waste Recovery Hierarch, which states that the last place food waste should go is a land fill! Your leftovers should be diverted to either feed hungry people, feed animals, or composted. Hey North Carolina aren’t you glad that even in the midst of a $3 billion dollar budget crisis in NC, we still have some money left over for this.
By Bob Unruh
The letter informs homeowners the inspections will probably take only about 15 minutes, but that all properties “will be considered a source of clear water discharges until an inspection can be conducted.”
WND Story, read full story here
This is coming to a town near you because as Chief of the Targeting and Evaluation Branch of the Enforcement Planning and Targeting and Data Division of the EPA, Richard Duffy said in 1996, (read it here ) ”That what gets measured, get’s done”
How can the EPA know if your drainpipes are “sustainable” if they cannot inspect them first? Let’s hope PA holds the line. Probably would not hurt to let your elected officials know about this one.