Agenda21 – The Beat Grows Stronger (updated 26may13)

More than two out of three Americans think that "government is out of control and threatening our basic liberties."  Fox News poll reported on 21 May 2013.

George Rebane

Last night we attended the Agenda21 talk at the Grass Valley Veterans Center given by anti-Agenda21 activist and author Rosa Koire.  Her talk was sponsored by our local CABPRO and was attended by about two hundred people who arrived from places as far as Reno and the bay area.  Ms Koire is a self-described liberal Democrat and ‘married’ lesbian who also happens to be an excellent and animated speaker, especially about Agenda21, a topic about which she is very well informed and quite passionate.  (We also bought her recent book Behind the Green Mask: UN Agenda 21.)

RR readers are familiar with my Agenda21 views, they are a matter of record and available in the ‘Agenda21’ section of this website.  Ms Koire emphasized that Agenda21 is a non-partisan issue. She went on to summarize the UN’s Agenda21 Sustainable Development initiative as “the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, all energy, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL”

In short, Agenda21 (first formulated in 1987) is the blueprint for the stage-wise achievement of a unified global government that rules the world within one standardized set of laws, regulations, and codes that will spread social justice uniformly over all lands and peoples.  The project is not a conspiracy or some ‘tin hat’ mythology, but an open initiative that in 1992 was signed on to by 179 world leaders that included President George HW Bush.

The fundamental thesis underlying this plan is that humanity’s current mode of living on the planet – lifestyles, modes of commerce, capitalism, property ownership, energy consumption, regions of habitation, etc – are unsustainable and must be drastically altered during the 21st century.

Agenda21 gained traction in the US under President Clinton who created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development “for the sole purpose of getting it into every city, county, and state in the US through federal rules, regulations, and grants.  This is a global plan but it is implemented locally.”  And that is the most important part, Agenda21 is not designed to advance under one global banner or initiative.  Instead, it is to progress bit by piece through local actions under easily marketable notions like ‘sustainability’ and ‘smart growth’ that are being written into local general plans, zonings, building codes, land use directives, etc across the country.

With such distributed and incremental local initiatives the goals of Agenda21 continue to be advanced without ever having to proclaim the end objective.  This makes it almost impossible for local elected officials and planning commissions to connect the dots.  Anyone appearing before such bodies to oppose the next property use denying or development inhibiting ordnance or code by pointing out how that would advance Agenda21 is simply dismissed as a ‘conspiracy theorist’ or right wingnut, with the local Left cheering on the electeds in their demonstrated wisdom and keen insight. 

(Nevada County is a poster child for witnessing the advance of Agenda21 exactly through such mechanisms.  Here our BoS not only cannot connect the dots, they don’t even see any dots to connect.  Their current alternative is to spend $500K and release a newly commissioned platoon of code enforcers to harass county residents for code violations in the attempt to collect fines and fees to make up for a lagging tax base and looming unfunded pension liabilities.)

The intent of this post is not to present a comprehensive review of Agenda21, that is available in its entirety as Agenda 21: Earth Summit: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio.  Here you will read how humans will be reconfigured to live and work in smartly stacked and packed communities, individual 24/7 monitoring, restricted to travel on public (state controlled) transportation through narrow corridors, and inhibited from even setting foot in “wildlands” which will cover the overwhelming proportion of the earth’s land areas.  All of this will be managed by new regional governments – replacing current local governments - that will uniformly execute centrally planned provisions under the overall control of a global government.  A term of art for this configuration of governance is ‘communitarianism’, which in its target embodiment pretty well subsumes everything that Karl Marx envisioned for us.

The talk lasted about ninety minutes and was followed by a Q&A period during which Jo Ann and I took our leave.  When getting into regional details Ms Koire pointed out a slew of NorCal organizations that follow The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide from ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives).  ICLEI is the UN’s boots-on-the-ground organizational framework that manages thousands of local ICLEI chapters worldwide.  There are over 500 of them in the US with California (where else?) claiming 100 of those.  Some typical names of local organizations which actually get into the implementation phase of Agenda 21 are ‘Vision 2035’, ‘Your Town 2025’, ‘One Bay Area’, ‘Plan NY’, … .

Closer to home, Ms Koire pointed to the Sierra Business Council (headquartered in Truckee) under the leadership of Mr Steven Frisch (RR reader and commenter) as the leading promulgator of Agenda21 provisions in the Sierra.  There are, of course, many more fine sounding organizations in these parts who are all concerned with smart growth, the environment, sustainable development, land trusts, etc and whose common denominator is to constructively remove the benefits of ownership by incrementally reducing the property rights of their current owners.

Ms Koire pointed out that in the Third Reich the Nazis did not bother to confiscate any lands or production capabilities from their original owners.  Their approach was much simpler – they just told the owners exactly what they must do with and on their land, what things in what quantities would be produced in the factories, and what goods would be sold in which shops.  Unfortunately, Agenda21 calls for a more draconian approach to the disposition of private property.

[25may13 update]  Mr Steven Frisch, CEO of the Sierra Business Council, has offered to debate Ms Rosa Koire.  The proposal was aired in the comment stream below (cf. 25 May 2013 at 08:59 AM below).  Another reader and KVMR’s news director, Mr Paul Emery has offered to carry the debate live on radio.  All good and well.  My own growing curiosity about the debate offer is what will be the contending notions that warrant a debate.  Will they involve the reality of the A21’s Rio proposals, the fact that so many countries have signed up, that ICLEIs have been established to promote the A21 objectives (including training local activists and sympathetic community leaders on how to make the most progress), …, or??  Perhaps Mr Frisch will take the position that the whole Agenda 21 thing is simply another rightwing “rural myth” or a chimera to oppose the progressive agenda which has nothing to do with Agenda 21.

Then there’s the viewpoint taken by Mr Emery that Ms Koire is simply going around the country spraying audiences with her debatable “assumptions”.  And that these need to be appropriately countered to clear the air once and for all.  I don’t know, but it sure would be an interesting encounter that should provide more light than heat.  Should Ms Koire accept and come back to Nevada County, Jo Ann and I would even invite her to stay with us to minimize the cost of her visit.

[26may13 update]  The following comment as posted below by Russ Steele is substantial and important contribution to the topic of this post.  I have decided to include it as an update so that it becomes more visible part of the subject matter.

Nevada County’s initial brush with Agenda 21 was the NH2020 initiative that was managed by Sierra Business Council under the guidance of Izzy Martin, then the BOS Chair and charter member of the Gang Four that were promoting sustainable development, which was eventually written in to the County land use plans and regulations. Not with an Agenda 21 sub title, but with the full intent of implementing sustainable development. And, we are living with the economic results today.

Sustainable Development entered the world officially in 1987 in a report of the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development entitled, "Our Common Future". This commission was chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime minister of Norway and Vice-President of the World Socialist Party.

The theme of this report was "meeting today's need's without compromising future generations to meet their own needs". If one is to look, this mission statement has been incorporated into many government and non-government organizations. You will find this them embedded in their mission also, but it will be called "community planning", "comprehensive planning", "growth management planning", or "smart growth". I am sure your have heard those words tossed around in public meeting in Nevada County.

Community planning, it is based on the creation of councils called "visioning councils". These councils are manipulated in such a way as to arrive at a pre-determined outcome. The professional facilitators of the meeting work hard to make sure all those involved are easily swayed into being agreeable. The process utilizes group manipulation tactics. Most people fear the thought of looking foolish in front of others and tend to keep quiet.

I went to the Sierra Business Council Leadership Training program, where we were taught how to control the out come of public meetings. How to insure the group eventually agreed with the per-determined out come. Out comes which could be reported in the press, presented at Supervisor and City Council Meetings as the will of the community. We learned how to handle vocal opposition, those unwilling to go along with the pre-determined vision by using mockery to shut them up, or get them to not return to future visioning sessions.

Sacramento Region went through this visioning process and developed a “Blue Print” for the region, including surround counties of Yuba, Sutter, Yolo, Sacramento, and Placer County. Nevada and El Dorado County were excluded from the “Blue Print” region. Maybe because of the strong conservative forces in these counties, that would see through the visioning process and the predetermined outcomes.

Your can see the Full Preferred Blue Print here -- http://www.sacregionblueprint.org/

The Sac Metro Transportation Blue Print for Sustainable Community is here -- http://www.sacog.org/2035/

When your look at this Blue Print for Sustainable Community it is clear the goal is to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by building transit centric communities, with walking paths, bike trails and golf cart paths linking to transit facilities, business and shopping centers. This goes back to Greg’s point about AGW. The reason for reducing VMT is to reduce CO2 emissions.

We were fortunate to have beat down NH2020, but it will come back in other forms. Remember that when you are invited to a community vision meeting. You will be being lead down a predetermined path to sustainability under the influence of Agenda 21. No one will mention Agenda 21, only the buzz words of sustainable development.

What can you do? Ask your Supervisor/City Council Person if he or she has attended the SBC Leadership Training Program. Ask if they have attended the ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) training seminars, if they have funded Staff to attend the SBC Training or ICLEI Training? Do the same at your City Council Meeting.

And, last but not least, go to the vision meetings with a clear understanding what they are up to and make your voices heard, there is no place for Agenda 21 in Nevada County. We did it for NH2020 and we can do it again!

Posted by: Russ Steele | 25 May 2013 at 10:05 PM

[26may13 update2]  As Mr Frisch reported in this post's comment stream, he did contact Ms Koire with his debate proposal.  Ms Koire emailed me her reply to Mr Frisch which I post here with her permission.

Hi Steve,

It's too bad that you weren't able to attend my very well-advertised speech or call in to either of the local radio call-in shows that I did in advance.  You could have had your public exchange at that time.  I have moved on to another state now and am fully booked into 2014.  Unfortunately, there isn't enough time for me to return to towns and cities that I've covered. 

There is nothing to debate.  The truth and the proof is in the paper trail that includes not only the United Nations reports and conferences, but also the legislative history of our country and the well-documented activities of the UN organizations, Non-Governmental Organizations and associations and councils such as your own.

Rosa Koire, ASA

Executive Director
Post Sustainability Institute
PostSustainabilityInstitute.org
DemocratsAgainstUNAgenda21.com
SantaRosaNeighborhoodCoalition.com

Comments

[George Rebane]

SteveF 116pm - I do think that we continue to talk past each other. You have not understood a single thing that I have said about A21.

As amazing as it may sound, like MichaelA, I too evaluate proposed land use, development, and environmental policies based on their merits and not on whether they conform to A21 or that they may have been first proposed by some collectivists. After all, there is an overlap in our objectives, and even in some of our means.

I believe what you attribute to me in your 116pm is intended to achieve another objective. And I do also believe that what you have written confirms and solidifies your objectives as I (and perhaps others) understand them. Perhaps that is a contribution after all.

[Steve Frisch]

George Rebane | 26 May 2013 at 02:51 PM

Really George, what other objective do you think I have in mind? I don't think you have understood a word that either Michael or I have said either, but I don't attribute it to stupidity, as you are fond of implying here.

I too evaluate proposed land use, development, and environmental policies based on their merits and not on whether they conform to A21 or that they may have been first proposed by some libertarian.

This is evidenced by the fact that I have often openly supported development proposals (like Homewood, Boulder Bay, Loma Rica Ranch, the Truckee Railyard project, the Domus and roadway re-alignment projects in Kings Beach, the Cabin Creek biomass plant, re-opening the Loyalton plant, numerous timber harvest plans, the Lincoln 'super sewer', the Auburn Ravine project and about a dozen other projects around the Sierra that most readers have never heard of) and support numerous environmental policies that main line environmental organizations have opposed.

Yet you and other persist in labeling people socialists, collectivists, communists, and even fascists (in some of the most amazing historical revisionist twisting of vocabulary I have ever heard), and attributing to them what almost everyone would agree are evil motives, even obliquely comparing accused implementers of A21 to Nazi's in the opening post.

[Russ Steele]

Steven Frisch wrote at 01:16PM A21 is actually irrelevant...

I guess that Steven Frisch forgot that he was partnering with the UN’s ICLEI in conducting CO2 emission surveys. Here is a quote from a memo from the Nevada County Planning Department to the Board of Supervisors, dated May 7th 2012:

In August 2010, Nevada County was approached by the Sierra Business Council (SBC) to participate in the Green Communities Program administered by PG&E under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission in partnership with SBC and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA. The purpose of this voluntary program is to provide local jurisdictions with easy-to-understand information, technical expertise, and financial resources to support local climate action planning efforts. The program has three phases including a local government greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory (Phase I), a community-wide GHG emissions inventory (Phase II), and a Climate Action Plan (Phase III). Currently Phases I and II are complete and Phase III is contingent upon funding.

Now why would the the SBC and ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA [Note they removed any UN reference in the revised organization name and added USA.] be doing CO2 surveys? Because it was part of the Agenda 21 effort to reduce greenhouse gases and control global warming, which the UN determined was a threat to the sustainability of the planet and all the species on it.

Mr. Frisch never answered my question if he and his staff had attended the ICLEI training camp. Since he refused to answer, I guess we can assume that he has and they have. So all this sustainability for sustainability for sake was just some twaddle by Mr Frisch. We now know that his organization teamed up with ICLEI, so it hard to claim no UN involvement by SBC.

The Memo goes on:

Phase I of the program established a 2005 baseline of GHG emissions produced by Nevada County owned facilities and activities. For Phase II of the program, SBC staff established a 2005 baseline of GHG emissions produced by community-wide activities in Nevada County using the International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol (IEAP) and ICLEI's Local Government Protocol. SBC staff also used the Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 software to measure certain emissions.

So, what do you think? Is SBC in bed with the UN ICLEI or not? If “Agenda 21 is irrelevant” why was he teaming up with one of the implementing organizations and using their tools?

[Paul Emery]

Wow Steve! You are indeed a fellow traveler. This is getting more comic by the minute.

[Paul Emery]

Russ

So PG&E is also part of the effort as well as the Nevada County Planning Department and the California Public Utilities Commission. They're everywhere...Even using some vintage 50's McCarthy slogans like "in bed with" and "training camps"

The fact is Russ whether you like it or not Global Warming is accepted by this government as a true problem and there are legislated and funded programs to deal with researching and mitigating it's effects. If you don't like it change the government don't go after the foot soldiers. If you have a gripe it should be steered towards the Republican Party for not exercising effective opposition.

[George Rebane]

re PaulE's 536pm - Actually the good fight is necessarily a two-pronged one. Yes, we are dunning our national Repubs for not sticking to principles, but we also have to stand up to the kool-aid sotten local leftists, because they are the ones making it happen where we live. Capice?

[Michael Anderson]

George wrote: "...but we also have to stand up to the kool-aid sotten local leftists, because they are the ones making it happen where we live. Capice?"

Oh yeah, we have the whole "capice" thing down pat. Sort of a Tony Soprano thing, without the muscle behind it.

How about we all "capice" that we live in this town together, and we need to find our commonalities instead of our differences? How 'bout we capice that?

[Ben Emery]

George,
Thanks for the 26 May 2013 at 08:47 AM reply.

[George Rebane]

MichaelA 1056pm - IMHO you really don't have a clue about the "capice thing". The problem with living in the same town with progressives is that they are constantly pushing to increase the existing pile of laws, regulations, restrictive codes, required permits,..., and, of course, the related taxes, fees, etc that continually reach into our wallets and/or decrease our ability to dispose of our property as we wish (i.e. property ownership). When one side so rapaciously pursues the other, it is hard to sit down and talk about commonalities.

[Todd Juvinall]

George is truly on the mark. One only needs to look at the management of our national and state forests to see the idiocy of big government and the laws made for the progressives implemented in their management. The timber and mining industries, as well as the dredging for gold have been wiped out. The use of the "public" lands has been restricted so that only an able bodies Sierra Clubber can gain access. No one in a wheelchair or a motor vehicle need apply in "wilderness" areas.

Then we have the reach of Obamacare. Down to the escrow closings of your home sale. The reach of these laws and regulations is overarching. And I thought the "liberals" were for the rights of man?

A21 is one layer which has permeated the desire of people that love big government. Try to put a seven foot fence on your own property line. Then you will see the reach of your liberal rules and regulations.

Regarding the General Plan here and elsewhere. If you read it you will see the total takings of your private property. You cannot do squat without the approval of a PC, zoning guy or the BOS. Then if you are lucky enough to get that right to use your own property, the neighbors sue your ass to stop you. Look at Rincon del Rio as the latest example.

[Ben Emery]

George,
There is a middle ground and I think what has been taking place in Nevada County has balanced it pretty well. The rhetoric on the right is a free for all and on the left is morality legislation. Neither work by themselves but the end result is what we get. That is how a two party system works despite local politics being "non partisan". Unfortunately for those of us who are on the so called left are tired of big business controlling and increasing the scope of our government to suppress the individual and benefit big business/ wealthy. The so called right are tired of the steady increase in the size of government and its intrusion of our personal lives. I truly believe we are talking about the same issue but from different angles.

[Paul Emery]

Todd, George

While we're on the topic of land use regulations what is your view on the Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance passed last year by our Board of Supervisors that allows the Sheriffs Department to enter and inspect your property for "compliance checks" virtually at will without a verified complaint. Is this a "takings" of your public property since State Law permits Marijuana Cultivation.

[George Rebane]

BenE 916am – Food for thought Ben. However, I’m not aware of any conservative, libertarian, and most certainly not any conservetarian who favors corporatism – the form of capitalism in which government is needed to maintain the viability of big corporations that would otherwise fail. And we are all aware of unions that very much promote corporatism as long as union memberships are increased. Of course big corporate and big union managements know well how to game that through their individual ‘special relations’ with the executive and legislative branches. Perhaps that is the common ground/perception you identify.

But I’d like to consider a thought experiment. To reliably test the divers approaches to local governance, could we not have cities and/or counties that adopt competing progressive vs conservative approaches. Such jurisdictions would advertise themselves as a ‘progressive community’ or a ‘conservative community’ and be then populated by people of the appropriate worldview and ideology. Both types of jurisdictions would then forgo the kind of divisive contentions we have today, and instead focus on the fine tuning of their communities to provide the kind of lifestyles that each cohort expects and appreciates.

Were such jurisdictions come into being, I can guarantee that no one with conservetarian leanings would even consider moving into a progressive community. But I’m not so sure about the other way around. And I say that because of the history of how progressives have moved into quiet (even staid) and stable conservative communities, always to change them into new islands of political contention. In the last decades, the mountain counties of the Sierra are perfect examples of this.

There are many things mitigating against the possibility of this kind of laboratories of democracy on the local level. The prime force being the tax and spend policies of state and federal governments. By force, these giant governments take excessive monies from local communities, and then return some fraction of them with stringent conditions that are designed to reduce local self-determination and governance.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 927am - My position on legalization of drugs is a matter of record.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/homeiscastle.htm

I think it's reprehensible that local jurisdictions must struggle to construct local ordnances in a conflicting and contrary legal environment imposed by state and federal governments. This is yet another reason why conservetarians want limited scope governments - political scumbags don't legislate effectively.

In principle I am against any public or private agency having the right to enter my property without due process. To me the Fourth Amendment says it all.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/homeiscastle.htm

[Todd Juvinall]

If you wish to grow ganga and smike it on your own property, have at it. MJ users are so dopey after all that smoking they are not a threat to anyone except the food in the fridge.

[Ben Emery]

George,
A lot to comment on with your 27 May 2013 at 10:05 AM comment. I will answer the first point of what is corporatism. Much like other forms of government it takes many different shapes. Corporatism in the traditional sense is fascism. When government and private sector interests feed off of each other. The form of corporatism free marketeers promote is corporations/ free market to dictate and shape our society and cultures. In a sense having the free market/ corporations take the role of government.

I think the line that gets blurred way to often is the line that Capitalism is an economic system not a system of governance.

[George Rebane]

BenE 248pm - I agree with your last sentence.

In fascism, at least the kind practiced in the Third Reich, "government and private sector interests did NOT feed off each other", Hitler ran a command economy, pure and simple.

I know of no free marketers who promote, or free markets that sustain any kind of a corporation that can "dictate and shape our society and cultures." We must have vastly different understandings of what is a free market.

No markets in a country in which the state historically commands about 20% of GDP can be called free. And now through Obamacare and permanent ruinous spending we will add another 20% for a total of 40% for the government's share of our economy. This, in effect, will make America's markets anything but free in what will become a command economy. But then, that's just fulfilling another A21 tenet.

[bill tozer]

Ben, you appear to equal Corporatism with Capitalism. Its not all black and white and I agree the lines get blurred. Was GM too big to fail? Who says so? Why were little old lady pensioners who invested in GM bonds along with teacher pensions FORCED to accept 10 cents on the dollar so that the government could fire the head of GM and give the UAW preferred bonds at 7% and perhaps a billion of preferred stock. I don't think that is capitalism....more like fascism when government marries a corporation and becomes head of household.

Why did 70%-80% of the Stimulus money flow into States that turned around and passed the money baton to government employees and teacher's unions? That bridge that collapsed in Washington State did not see any money. The government workers and the teachers were spared layoffs during the last recession and turned around and sent the money back to Washington, not in the form of taxes, but in the form of contributions. Thought there were supposed to be 400,000 new jobs rebuilding highways and bridges and levees. Here we go around the mulberry bush, ashes, ashes, we all fall down.

I am not sure what to call our current form of governance. Crony capitalism just does not accurately describe taking money and pouring it into the bottomless rat hole known as public service employees. Funny how our public servants walked away just fine as levees still need repairing and roads were repaved rather than built.

North Korea just announced reforms. They are sooo delicious. An employer can now pay his employees more if he chooses after paying the government and fees, if any profit remains. Isn't that grand! Of course the government controls all the means of production and will let you make only what it tells you to make or can make. Don't know if that is socialism or not, but they call that socialism in North Korea.

Back to the topic of Dr. Rebane's article:

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."

James Madison

[Gregory]

Regarding the "capice" thing, it's "capisce". Capisci?

Russ, thanks for the smoking guns on Frisch's latest lying by omission, but note if you go to the parent organization pushing this in the US, it is as I've been claiming... it's all AGW as its #1 reason for existing.
http://www.icleiusa.org/sustainability/five-milestones-for-sustainability
http://www.icleiusa.org/action-center/getting-started/iclei2019s-five-milestones-for-climate-protection

Frisch *has* to fight to marginalize climate realism because the whole sustainability movement is *based* on global warming as a crisis. As soon as it becomes clear that we won't run into a crisis of availability for well over a century, and that we'd need to put over four times the CO2 than the industrial revolution deposited to get a degree or two of temperature increase (and maybe less) over whatever the natural variation may be (and that possible variation is larger, up and down, than man's contribution), the whole sustainability movement, including "Agenda 21", goes down for the count.

Of course, Frisch and Friends will be searching for a new hook to hang it on but I doubt that will fly, especially if the world takes an economic tumble. Modern environmentalism is an upper middle class affectation that requires wealth that doesn't have anything better to do.

Frisch, please answer Russ' very reasonable question: have you or your staff attended ICLEI training sessions?

Paul, PG&E is ground zero for AB32. Whether they want to or not, they dance to the sustainability tune. They can fight or put up with it and figure out how to make a buck no matter which way the wind blows in Sacramento, and they have a responsibility to their stockholders to make a profit which means they put up with it.

[Michael Anderson]

Gregory wrote: "...because the whole sustainability movement is *based* on global warming as a crisis..."

Ummm, really? George claims to be a sustainability kinda guy, w/o AGW, and I would suggest that fixing the problem with the Pacific Gyre (http://obscureclaire.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/a-recycling-idea-from-make-magazine-save-the-oceans/) has nothing to do with AWG. Just one example.

[George Rebane]

Re SteveF and SBC partnering with a local ICLEI - I think that RussS (433pm) has answered my own question and Rosa Koire's assertion about SBC being a leading regional proponent of A21. The quoted Nevada County Planning Dept memo makes clear the intent, whether realized or not, for SBC and the local ICLEI to do A21 work in our region.

One would have expected SteveF to be a bit contrite about all this after he has continued to maintain A21 relevancy to what's going on in these parts and deny A21 influence on his activities. I'm glad none of us were holding our breaths waiting for such an admission; perhaps even stronger denials are on the way.

[Gregory]

Umm, really, MA. I don't think George claims membership in the sustainability movement but can be expected to be not bet on things that aren't sustainable, such as deficit spending and sweeping unfunded liabilities under the budget rug.

Or pumping the prehistoric Ogallala aquifer dry in order to grow Federally subsidized corn for ethanol to use to adulterate gasoline for a net energy loss at a high price. We'll run out of that water long before we run out of fossil fuels. Madness.

[Paul Emery]

George RE 26 May 2013 at 10:03 PM

So the Nevada County Board of Supervisors that vote on and support the General Plan and regional planning initatives are all part of the local leftist aggregate that promote and advance AG21. Also then you must include include the Grass Valley City Council, Nevada City Council and LAFCO reps.

" we also have to stand up to the kool-aid sotten local leftists, because they are the ones making it happen where we live."

[Michael Anderson]

List of Unsustainable Things:

1. Deficit spending -- Check!
2. Unfunded liabilities -- Check!
3. Draining Ogallala -- Check!
4. Plastic & Foam Crap Going Into the Pacific Gyre -- Check!
5. Every family on the planet (9 billion by 2050) has 2 cars, a 2K sq. ft. home, washer-dryer, meaningful work, and a retirement plan -- Check!

[Steve Frisch]

You're damn right a response is on the way....but I am busy watching Kill Bill Vol. II right now!

This is no revelation, it has been a matter of public record for more than 2 years, and has been commented on here, it is not like you guys discovered something......my organization measures greenhouse gas emissions for local governments....I am proud of that.

Using an ICLEI tool does not make anyone an implementer of A21...it is using a tool, ........approved by numerous state and federal agencies to do a job....

You guys are crazy ....bat shit crazy....certifiably crazy...

But I will note: the sainted fellow certifiably crazy Ms. Koire is too cowardly to come debate...she is quite happy throwing around accusations in front of 200 people....but in a real debate, requiring sources and facts, I would eat her lunch, and you guys know it.

Oh, and Michael is entirely correct about the sustainability movement, it is most definitely not dependent on climate change to be relevant.....

[Paul Emery]

In short, should we repeal the Nevada County General Plan as adopted in 1996 and subsequently amended in 2008 (Safety) and 2010 (Circulation/Housing).

http://www.mynevadacounty.com/nc/cda/planning/Pages/Nevada-County-General-Plan.aspx

[Steve Frisch]

By the way, I notice all of you military veterans (and non-veteran posters like Greg) are over on the other thread taking Todd to task for calling Paul Emery a draft dodger when he served his country and was honorably discharged (on Memorial Day). I think your stripes are really showing now...

[Steve Frisch]

One last thing for the night before I retire, have any of you actually read Behind The Green Mask? I have. I read it right after it came out. It is almost completely unsourced. It is like a 200 page opinion piece...no footnotes, no source documents cited for numerous accusations, and riddled with illogical statements. It is amongst the least 'scholarly' works I have ever read. Don't you get it? She is selling herself....

[Bill Tozer]

Mr. Frisch. I am speechless. Shocked. You are picking on the author of Behind The Green Mask solely because she is a woman and a lesbian. Shame on you. You have displayed to all here you are a bigot, a sexist, and a homophobic lout. Your last sentence inferring the author is a prostitute is beyond repulsive. You are a hate monger. Things will change when your kind all die off.

Oh. I love what the left has taught me.

[Russ Steele]

Steven you have not answered my question:

". . . have you or your staff attended ICLEI training sessions?"

Any one want to make a bet, he will not answer the question?

[Gregory]

Frisch, Paul and Todd have a longstanding feud fueled by BS and misunderstandings (some bordering on the intentional) from both sides. Some of Todds Toddisms are from trying to illustrate absurdity by being absurd, something that he should leave to others. Same goes for Paul.

You on the other hand are well versed in lying my omission. Did it for your NH2020 shenanigans and in every campaign of yours since, at least that I am aware of.

[Gregory]

rather...

You on the other hand are well versed in lying BY omission.

[Michael Anderson]

"Mr. Frisch. I am speechless. Shocked."

Tozer. See your doctor first thing Tuesday morning. He will be able to adjust the dosage. All is well.

[Steve Frisch]

Russ Steele | 27 May 2013 at 11:00 PM
". . . have you or your staff attended ICLEI training sessions?"

Actually Russ, that is not what you asked me. You asked me, “Have you attended the ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) training camp?”

First, you need to answer a question for me, have you, Mr. Shaw [Steele] ever been in a North Korean prisoner of war camp? Because clearly Russ you are The Manchurian Candidate. Or perhaps I should ask have you been to Glen Beck camp?

The answer is no, NONE of us has ever been to an ICLEI "Camp".

The question, on its face and by its framing, is inherently prejudiced. It assumes that there is something wrong with training to use a tool designed by ICLEI and approved by the California Air Resources Board, a duly authorized state agency, to measure greenhouse gas emissions. The ICLEI GHG protocol is the national standard for measuring GHG emissions and allows local governments to compare themselves against both the standard and each other.

Members of my staff have been trained in the use of the tool, in a one-day classroom setting and via teleconference. There was no camp, no hypnotism, no sleep deprivation, no drugs, no shouting, no standing on your knees for hours on end, no prohibition from leaving the room, no dehumanizing of individuals by keeping them in filth, partial sensory deprivation, psychological harassment, or inculcation of guilt and group social pressure. There was a call in number though.

SBC helps local governments measure GHG emissions because the state of California has passed laws requiring emissions reductions, and the consideration of these emissions as part of their environmental review process. It just so happens we also think that reducing GHG emissions is a good thing since many of them have negative health and environmental effects.

Whether you like it or not Russ, AB 32 is the law, and local governments have a role in compliance. SBC’s program, in partnership with PGE, helps local governments comply at the lowest possible cost and in the most efficient manner. The California Public Utilities Commission has selected the Investor Owned Utilities [PGE, SCE, SDGE] to provide these services because they have the most relevant technical expertise and they cover most of the state. That is why more than 20 local governments in the Sierra Nevada are partnering with us in the program. In short we are providing a service. I am proud of providing that service and helping local governments save money.

There is absolutely nothing unreasonable or even "A21" about this.

Local governments who measure emissions receive multiple benefits, including: a clear understanding about where their emissions are generated thus giving them the opportunity to coordinate activities to reduce them and the operating expenses associated with them at the same time; the benefit of an early baseline measurement number thus giving them the opportunity to get credit for their already completed activities; an understanding of cumulative emissions thus covering many normal activities under standard CEQA review without need for more expensive CEQA review; a tool to consider alternatives based on solid measurement of performance;

Measuring GHG emissions has nothing to do with A21, and saying it does is yet another logical fallacy trying to tie local activities to some global conspiracy. If doing anything similar to anything in A21 is considered THE SAME as implementing A21, and making those engaged in those activities part of the 'program", then every single man, woman and child in Nevada County would be an "agent" of A21.

Yell at your kids to turn the lights out when they leave a room: you are an agent of A21.

You try to combine your trips to save gas: you are an agent of A21.

You put a solar panel on your roof: you are an agent of A21.

You prefer locally grown food: you are an agent of A21. [This would kind of make a lot of the new CABPRO agents of A21!]

You ride a bike: you are an agent of A21.

I think you get my drift....A21 is irrelevant....because every time you do something that might have been mentioned in the A21 document in Rio 20 years ago, it does not mean that your are implementing what they recommended. They also used prepositions, am I am agent of A21 every time I use a preposition? You might just be doing it because you want to save money on your utility bill, lower your fuel cost, generate your own electricity, or eat a peach. No global plan there, just everyday people living thier everyday lives.

[Steve Frisch]

By the way, not responding on a blog is not "refusing to answer". People do have lives and loved ones to spend some time with you know.

[Ben Emery]

George,
27 May 2013 at 03:20 PM

What free marketeers such as yourself have expressed over and over again is outside of a military and law enforcement society should be left to the free market.

"I know of no free marketers who promote, or free markets that sustain any kind of a corporation that can "dictate and shape our society and cultures." We must have vastly different understandings of what is a free market."

I know what the free marketeers are taught about free markets but theory and practice are two different beasts. By default the corporate world becomes a pseudo government. The commons have to be maintained by some entity. It has been shown over and over again as we allow the market to dictate more of our societies it becomes a very brutal system for those who have little money. Just as if we let the government to dictate our individual behaviors it becomes punitive based society, which is no good either.

[Todd Juvinall]

Russ, didn't SBC make a couple of presentations to the Board of Supervisors a couple of years ago that were sponsored or paid for by the ICLEI? I thought they were quoting that in their presentation?

Whenever Frisch is caught with his and on the taxpayers cookie jar he drones on and on. He just did it again. Too funny!!

[Bill Tozer]

"It has been shown over and over again as we allow the market to dictate more of our societies it becomes a very brutal system for those who have little money."

Newsflash Mr. Ben: Having little money is brutal no matter what society you live in throughout history. That is why Abe Lincoln wrote about bettering one's lot in life through individual liberties and freedoms. Probably at least 3% of able bodied males in society are sluggards. For that 3%, without finding a lady who has a job, a car, and a roof over her head life is indeed brutal for them.

[Steve Frisch]

Todd, get your facts straight, we never said any presentation was paid for or sponsored by ICLEI. THAT IS A LIE. We stated that the presentation of data developed through the inventories were paid for with funding from the California Public Goods Charge managed by the California Public Utilities Commission through a contract with PG&E.

This is the very same funding that Russ is accessing to do outreach and communications work on the Gold Country Broadband Consortium....so if I am a rent seeking leach, so is Russ. But of course he would likely say, "Broadband Good--Me Good/Greenhouse Gas Emission Measurement Bad--Frisch Communist"

What a bunch of hypocrites.

[Russ Steele]

To give some context to Steven's 05:50AM, please read Chapter 9 of Agenda 21. You can Google Agenda 21, down load a copy and then use Adobe Reader and use the search function to find key words, like greenhouse gas, global warming , etc. You will discover these terms in Chapters Nine and Seventeen. Perhaps others as well. Once you read Chapter nine you can make your own decision about the validity of Stevens argument that "Agenda 21 is irrelevant."

As for the use of the ICLEI GHG protocol models. Who has validated the assumptions in these computer models. We know from experience that the UN IPCC climate models are not valid. 20 years of climate data has shown them to be seriously flawed. What proof do we have the that the CO2 assessment tools are valid? Claiming they are industry standards with out telling us who certified the models is just more hand waving my Steven.

[Gregory]

"The answer is no, NONE of us has ever been to an ICLEI "Camp""

OK, so 1) there has been no ICLEI training called a "Camp" that SBC staff has attended, and 2) yes, there was a day's training on some ICLEI software. We are left hanging on whether there has been more connections between any ICLEI entity and SBC that isn't called a "Camp".

Funny how this wasn't discussed back when Frisch was campaigning against Prop 23. Imagine had Frisch's op-eds in The Union been prefaced with disclosures that his SBC's business of helping cities and counties complying with AB32 mandates that would be in jeopardy had 23 passed.

All of that goes away when AGW alarmism goes away, or the state goes bankrupt. In the meantime, California businesses can ship energy intensive activities to places that don't have to deal with greenhouse gas inventories from the likes of SBC. Apple and HP seem happy with China. North Carolina is also a beneficiary. Wyoming even got a climate supercomputer because cheap electricity from coal trumped where the electricity came from.

Every drop of oil and every chunk of coal that is extracted will be burned. Making a list, checking it twice, finding out which counties and cities are naughty or nice doesn't change that. It does, however, make for a rent that can be collected.

[Todd Juvinall]

I was simply asking a question SteveF and you go apoplectic and call people liars. Too funny. You are a self proclaimed rent seeking leach and the science you prostitute is junk. But hey, this is America and soon you will be on Cable TV as a great absconder of the taxpayers money and probably become as famous as Madoff. What a hoot!

Thanks for admitting your ICLEI connection. Just as I thought.

[Steve Frisch]

Hey how about Greg, Russ, George and Todd post the contents of their investment portfolios so we can see if they are motivated to deny climate change to protect their economic interest? I thought not.

Fortunately, in my case, I know I am not motivated by my economic interest, because if I were I could have made a lot more money by rejecting my values.

The last refuge of the incompetent is to question the motives of their opponent instead of the facts of their case.

A21 talks about water treatment, credit availability, health care, access to birth control, biotechnology and local food supply. Is everyone working on those issues a dupe of the A21 crowd wittingly or unwittingly implementing a global plan for mind control (which is what Ms. Koire contends)?

If that is the case I suggest you go after Chuck Shea for being an advocate of local food supply, he is clearly an agent of the UN.

[Steve Frisch]

Too bad your peerless leader Rosa is too cowardly to actually face those she accuses. I can't wait to get a copy of the tape of the CABPRO meeting, but true to form Chuck Shea has not responded to my e-mail offering to pay for a copy for three days.

[Todd Juvinall]

What you are missing SteveF is a very simple thing regarding the debate on A21 etal. This is strictly my view, the others can speak for themselves.

I want to have a clean environment. The difference between you and me is you want the government to force me to do their view of that protection and I want to have the freedom to do it myself. Very simple.

[Todd Juvinall]

It truly is fascinating that SteveF is insulting Mr. Loire here. Perhaps that makes him feel like a man?

[George Rebane]

Now that the SBC/ICLEI connection is settled, we can step back and acknowledge that the UN-distanced ICLEIs are also "tools" that local agencies (especially NGOs) can use in their activities that happen to be in line with A21 objectives.

SteveF strongly promotes the new and improved ICLEI visage that portrays this organization as if it has had only an incidental relationship to A21. You get the official line here.
http://www.icleiusa.org/about-iclei/faqs/faq-iclei-the-united-nations-and-agenda-21

Enough has been written (see the Agenda21 section) about California's abhorrent AB32 law so that we don't have to revisit its damage and continuing assault on the state's economy and people, but only to recognize SBC's role in serving as a foot soldier in CARB's implementation and enforcement army.

Nevertheless, the global flavor of the international ICLEI mother temple "accelerating action" at local levels may be assessed here. http://www.iclei.org/home.html
It is then no wonder that local activists and acolytes wanting to get with the program will call on their regional ICLEI chapters to provide cohesive support for the grand hajj from local to global.

[Brad Croul]

Agenda 21 provacateurs vs. corporatistas video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCfE6Cr8M8U

[Paul Emery]

George, Todd

Do you also consider the Board of Supervisors and their planning department, the City Councils and their planning teams and LAFCO also to be foot soldiers. And also should the County Plan be revoked since it involves us in regional planning efforts?

[George Rebane]

PaulE 1138am - Yes, to the extent that their policy promotions parallel the A21 globalization objectives. (And please let's not circle the 'UN is control' barn again.)

The only parts of the (any) county plan that should be revoked are those that clearly form constructive takings of private property ownership.

[Gregory]

"Too bad your peerless leader Rosa is too cowardly to actually face those she accuses."

Frisch, you could have bought a ticket; hell, your employer even would have paid for it.

[Paul Emery]

Gregory

I've covered dozens of the hit and run book writers such as Rosa C. and they never stick around for questions or debate. They show up with boxes of books, give their well rehearsed rap designed to please the crowd, sell books, get paid and head out. Really, judging by the turnout it was not that significant an event. Max, the Crystal Skull sold out two nights (500 tickets) at the Nevada Theatre a couple years ago to make a comparison. Any UFO, JFK conspiracy blabber will pack the house.

George, does the "constructive takings" of private property that concerns you include the takings of land for the Keystone Pipeline?

"Trans Canada Corp. won court permission to build part of its Keystone XL pipeline across several contested tracts of southeast Texas farmland to carry Canadian tar-sands crude to Gulf Coast refineries.

State judge Tom Rugg Sr. granted the pipeline company’s requests to take possession of the tracts under state eminent- domain laws after a hearing today in Beaumont, Texas.

“The statutory requirements for the issuance of writs of possession are now met,” Rugg said in a two-page ruling, after TransCanada agreed to increase the size and type of surety bonds it posted in the proceeding.

The landowners urged Rugg to deny TransCanada’s access to the disputed tracts, citing a Texas Supreme Court ruling last year that limits the condemnation powers that pipelines can use under state law. "

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-28/transcanada-s-keystone-wins-right-to-take-pipeline-land.html

[Gregory]

Paul, it still stands that Frisch could have bought a ticket and been a pest, just as I could have bought a ticket to heckle McKibben when he was in town, but, as always, trying to teach a pig to sing just wastes your time and annoys the pig.

I doubt there is *anything* significant separating Frisch's SBC and the ICLEI groups. That doesn't require the SBC to be taking marching orders from anyone when that old invisible hand is at work. Birds of a feather generally will figure out how to flock together.

[Gregory]

"George, does the "constructive takings" of private property that concerns you include the takings of land for the Keystone Pipeline?"

That wasn't a county plan, Paul. You're changing the subject. Again.

[Paul Emery]

I'm speaking of the principal Gregory of government takings of private property that George is so concerned about. Why does it matter? Do the Feds have special privilege?

[Gregory]

"I'm speaking of the principal [sic] Gregory of government takings of private property that George is so concerned about."

What George actually wrote was "The only parts of the (any) county plan that should be revoked are those that clearly form constructive takings of private property ownership."

Constructive takings "refer to actions that amount to depriving an owner of the use and enjoyment of his/her property". I took George not as being against any eminent domain action that forced far market compensation for any taking, but rather the sort of death by 1000 cuts that the Steven Frischs of the world seem to want in place.

[Paul Emery]

Gregory

Obviously in my cited example the property owner was not satisfied with his compensation which in this case was a foreign corporation. So a foreign company can force property owners to sell their land for their corporate profit using the American Courts as a hammer. Hmmmm

[Ben Emery]

"George, does the "constructive takings" of private property that concerns you include the takings of land for the Keystone Pipeline?"

That wasn't a county plan, Paul."

I guess you haven't followed the XL Pipeline at all. A Keystone Pipeline already exists and it has taken place for years at the local and state levels. We can only assume that eminent domain has been used, politicians have been bought off, palms have been greased, and democracy has been circumvented once again by big business.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/what-i-found-on-my-road-trip-along-the-keystone-pipeline-route/article11706450/?service=mobile

"Keystone XL has been called “the most famous pipeline in the history of the world, even without being built yet” – although that’s not exactly true. Keystone XL is actually three distinct portions and much of it is, in fact, already built. The middle stretch, from Steele City, Neb. to Cushing, Okla., has pumped oil since February of 2011. The bottom section, from Cushing to Port Arthur, Tex., is being placed in the ground right now. Even the top leg, the most contentious segment that crosses the Canadian border and travels to Nebraska, is no figment of the imagination. Its pipes already lie piled on the ground in several spots across the northern states, just waiting to be welded together and lowered into the earth."

[Gregory]

"I guess you haven't followed the XL Pipeline at all."

I guess Ben can't follow the conversation, which was about constructive takings. The land was available for sale, TransCanada and the landowner couldn't reach a deal, and "Texas does allow the use of eminent domain for what are known as common carriers – infrastructure that would allow for the transport of people or commodities for the public’s use or benefit. That’s how things like highways and electrical transmission lines can get built. If a private company’s project qualifies as a common carrier, it’s good to go."

The Keystone XL was apparently determined to be a common carrier by the state of Texas (where the power to do so resides), so the pipeline will continue and the compensation will be determined by the courts.

That is so very not a "constructive takings" of the sort Frisch & Friends have been in the business of promoting. Might also not be fair, but that isn't the discussion here. It isn't as if the landowner is being kept from using the property as he intended; the only dispute was the price and TransCanada apparently decided they could get a better price though the court than the seller was demanding.

[George Rebane]

PaulE 123pm and following - Gregory has accurately conveyed my take and opinions on 'constructive takings' and the propriety of eminent domain proceedings. And "do the feds have special privilege?", you can bet the ranch that they do.

[Gregory]

"So a foreign company can force property owners to sell their land for their corporate profit using the American Courts as a hammer."

In this case, it's a foreign company building a common carrier in order to carry Canadian and US crude products to US refineries for US workers to refine and then distribute to the US and the world.

It wasn't a simpleminded "So a foreign company can force property owners to sell their land for their corporate profit using the American Courts as a hammer" like your bogus framing attempted to portray. It was arguably a common carrier as determined by the state of Texas, and benefits to Texas, Canada and the US as a whole can be expected.

All in all, I think it's entirely different than the eminent domain taking by a shopping mall of a family domicile that the family wanted to live in to pave over for a parking lot, and arguably a reasonable use of eminent domain. Otherwise, an unreasonable property owner who is the last holdout could get far more than market value based on a holding of the entire project for ransom, or someone wanting to damage the project because of their politics could override hundreds of thousands of other interested parties just because they could.

Every bit of the Canadian oil sands that the owners want to refine will be refined. Blocking the pipeline only increases the danger of ocean spills off the coast of BC and Washington.

“Its a bypass. You've got to build bypasses.” - Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

[Gregory]

I just found this gem by Frisch at the FUE's blog. As it's pointless for me to try to post at Pelline's, it makes sense to remark on it here:

"There is an entire chapter in Rosa Koire’s book “Behind The Green Mask” on how to disrupt public meetings.

Here are a few gems from that chapter:
“____________________________________
1) Enter the meeting separately and leave separately
2) Do not acknowledge other people in your group: don’t speak to each other. You are pretending that you do not know each other at all.
3) If you can avoid signing in do so. You want to remain anonymous. If you have to sign in give a fake name and e-mail address.
4) Don’t put your name tags on.
5) Do not introduce yourself as being part of a group.
6) Dress and groom yourself neatly. You are a rational, reasonable, intelligent member of your town.
7) If there are video cameras on try to avoid being filmed.
8) Stay Calm.

Enter the auditorium and sit in this pattern:

If the auditorium has theater-style seating you will sit in a diamond pattern; depending upon the size of the meeting you may have more than one diamond. One person in the front center, behind her a few rows a person on the left toward the aisle, and another on the right toward the aisle. Then continue this pattern by placing a single person in the center a couple of rows back from that row. You can see that you are covering a large area with your people and not bunching up. Observers will not see your connections with each other and will not see a team effort.”

I don't know what Koire calls it, but that's the common wisdom on how to disrupt a Delphi session, a facilitated "meeting" that is being guided to a predetermined outcome that will then be said to be a consensus. It apparently was the strategy used by Frisch & Co. at the NH2020 community meetings and, I suspect, all the meetings that SBC facilitates.

It doesn't "disrupt" the meeting, it just disrupts the effort to manufacture a false consensus by the meeting's organizers. Nice try, Steve.