CAPR: Citizens Alliance for Property Rights

This part of our site contains documents providing more information regarding events surrounding the One Bay Plan, a 25 year plan, whose objective is to force SMART GROWTH and SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT policies on all 9 counties of the SF Bay Area. There are also letter templates for you to use to communicate to the elected officials that in many cases are no longer representing the people that put them in power.

Under the “General” category you can make your own comments as you desire. Please try to keep your comments respectful. You can also ask questions and ask for further explaination for the things you find here.

Some of the posts on this site do not allow comment as they are there to provide information that can be substantiated from outside sources. These are known facts and as such are not subject to opinionated comments. If you find or know of an opposing theory that is substantiated and can be colaborated please let us know and provide all the necessary links. We will be happy to post and give credit where it is due.   Where we post opinions we do allow comment.

Join the RESISTANCE–Stop the Assault on the American Way of Life-Local Action is the KEY

www.bayarealibery.org

As the organizer of the SFBay 912 Project and a member of the National 912 Advisory Board (http://the912-project.com/agenda-21/), I was given an advanced copy of the book. For the past two years I have been educating people about the 25 year plan that is being developed in the SFBay Area called the One Bay Area Plan or Plan Bay Area. The Plan combines land use, transportation, and housing. It is being developed by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. This is top down, central planning. This is a real program, not fiction. This is AGENDA 21 masquerading under the terms Sustainable Communities Strategies, Smart Growth, Sustainable Development. There are similar plans all across the country. I appeared on The Blaze TV on November 19 to discuss our efforts to resist. I am a private citizen but a former USAF officer. I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and it is being trampled on and shredded by this type of planning. It is critical that average citizens start speaking up. Please educate yourself on this topic, get involved, join the resistance. Help restore America.
Below is my review:
“Agenda 21″, the book, takes the true implementation of the UN Agenda 21 policies to their logical extreme. Just a conspiracy theory some would say? No, aspects of it are being implemented now throughout the US under the names of sustainable development, Sustainable Communities Strategy and smart growth.. Our own Federal government through HUD, EPA, and DOT is pushing these policies. As usual, California is on the bleeding edge of the sustainable development movement. Having passed AB32 (Cap & Trade) and SB375 (Reduction of Green House Gasses), state and regional unelected bureaucrats are forcing communities to build high density housing near mass transit. The high density housing requirements come with the dictate that every city must have its’ “fair share” of housing for all income levels. The transportation policies imposed by sustainable development will make driving your car difficult and very expensive by reducing parking spaces and taxing people on vehicle miles traveled. Sustainable development.will not fund new roads or road repair. Instead, transportation dollars are diverted to inefficient mass transit. Sustainable development will restrict the use of private property through draconian land use policies. These “sustainable development” plans are forcing farmers and ranchers off their land by destroying dams and implementing restrictive water policies. As I read this book, my thoughts returned to George Orwell’s book “1984″. I wondered how many people in 1949, the year of its’ publication, read the book and thought it was pure fiction? Yet here we are, over 60 years later in the era of Big Brother, Thought Control and Newspeak. Looking 60 years in to the future to 2072, what will the world be like. On our current trajectory of sustainable development policies, “Agenda 21″ vision of the future could become all too real. How do we stop this? Emmeline, the heroine of the story, asked someone from the older generation how this could have happened. The older woman replied that there were 4 types of people when the policies started:
1. The believers who supported everything. 2. The protesters, who spoke out at great risk but were silenced. 3. The quiet and watchful who kept their heads down and said nothing. 4. The passive unbelievers who did not try to act until it was too late
Becoming a type 2 person (THE PROTESTERS) is the key to stopping this. The 912 Project promotes the concept that “We Surround Them”, ie there are more of us than there are politicians and bureaucrats. We just have to get educated, organized and stand up in large enough numbers.
Wake up America. Agenda 21 is here and it is real. LOCAL is the key to stopping this. It is time to get involved in your local community and stop this. We need everyone to become type 2 people (THE PROTESTERS) who cannot be silenced because there will be too many of us. Let’s not let the fiction of Glenn Beck’s “Agenda 21″ become the reality of sustainable development in the United States of America.
**AGENDA 21 is a real program of the United Nations. However, it is being implemented at all levels of government using the terms SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGIES, smart growth, and sustainable development. These are the terms that you will see in the local and regional plans.
For more information on how to fight this in your local community google 912 Project Agenda 21. If you are in the SFBay Area and would like to get more involved, please check out my website and sign up for my free email to get alerts on what is happening in the Bay Area Liberty  at www.bayarealiberty.org

Will 200,000 California Residents BE MOVED?

We may think the 1940′s, with the relocation of 110,000 Japanese to internment camps, are long gone. We would like to think that Americans have learned from mistakes of the past.  Yet, could this issue possibly be rearing its ugly head again? Unfortunately, the answer is yes coming from California, the land of utopian statists who want to control how and where people live, work, and play.

The One Bay Area Plan or Plan Bay Area is a 25-year plan that includes housing, transportation, and land use based on the requirements of California law SB375. The plan calls for massive centralized command and control on how Bay Area residents will live in the coming decades. In fact, elite bureaucrats actually dream about moving more than 200,000 people from the East Bay to San Francisco! Read complete article here

Published in The Revered Review: Newspaper of Small Town America

w:

This article was published in California Political News and Views

http://capoliticalnews.com/2012/07/23/toolbox-of-tyranny-vehicle-mileage-tax-vmt-control-social-engineering-to-save-the-planet/

One Bay Area Plan (Plan Bay Area) is a 25 year plan that combines housing, transportation, and land use.  It is ostensibly designed to “save the planet” by reducing Green House Gasses (GHG), yet they waive the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) if a project is built to their specifications (stack and pack, high density housing, near mass transit).  So what is the real objective?  The real objective is to institutionalize a methodology to control and manipulate the population.  The intention is to limit and direct behavior to the type of behaviors desired by Utopian masterminds.  They want to develop SHEEPLE who will blindly and passively comply with all the rules and regulations.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the recent decision to “study” the implementation of a vehicle mileage tax (VMT). The VMT would require that each car in the Bay Area have a GPS.  Each mile that an individual drives would be tracked and charged at the rate of .10/mile.  The money, estimated at $15 million/day, would be used to fund further utopian schemes such as buses, trollies, light rail that few people ride, affordable housing, bike lanes and open space.http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/19/4642827/officials-float-san-francisco.html

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) are the regional, unelected bureaucrats designing the One Bay Area, which will implement all these policies.  They held public “visioning sessions” from June 20, 2012 through  June 27, 2012.   MTC took comments from the public regarding input to the One Bay Area EIR scoping strategy.  At the time, the public was presented with a set of options to consider.   The VMT tax was never mentioned as part of those discussions.  That set of options can be found here: (http://www.onebayarea.org/pdf/EIR_Scoping_062212_final_MTC_ABAG-3.pdf page 32 and33 ).

In fact on slide 32, it lists Alternative 5 that simply discusses transit level service and HOV lanes.

After all public comments were received,  MTC and ABAG added the issue of the VMT. On July 13, after public comments were closed, MTC briefed the Board regarding alternative 5 which included a discussion of VMT, http://apps.mtc.ca.gov/meeting_packet_documents/agenda_1908/EIR_Alternatives_071212_DV.pdf slide 12.

What happened between the time of public input and the time of presentation to the Board for a vote was that certain favored groups, specifically Transform, Public Advocates, and Urban Habitat, submitted this proposal (see page 15 *) that includes:

1. Upzoning would be expanded to more areas in the Bay.  This would mean  even more requirements for high density housing in cities that do not have their “fair share” of low income people.
2. Development fees would be eliminated for affordable housing developments, while subsidies would be used for favored activities.
3. Communities of Concern (read low income and communities of color) would receive funds from these windfall profits that the region would receive
4. Road pricing would be implemented to reduce driving, although the proposed VMT tax will EXEMPT ALL LOW-INCOME DRIVERS

The VMT is designed to give favored status to certain groups.  These groups represent organizations that want to transfer wealth through the heavy hand of regional government interfering in the housing, transportation and land use market place.

After all public comments were received the MTC and ABAG added the issue of the VMT .  On July 19, MTC and ABAG held a special meeting to vote on moving the EIR scoping to the next level ( ** http://apps.mtc.ca.gov/meeting_packet_documents/agenda_1882/4_EIR_Alternatives.pdf see page 15).   The letter was dated July 9 but public input was not closed until July 11 and did not include mention of a petition that over 1,000 people signed to delay the scoping by 6-12 months.

Between the visioning meetings and the special hearing, they inserted the VMT tax option without any public discussion on that particular issue.  Basically, they passed the issue by hiding it inside of the overall One Bay Area Plan EIR scoping vote.

If you don’t think that One Bay Area Plan will have any impact on your life and wealth, think again.  The One Bay Area contains 8 key “policy levers” that are designed to manipulate your behavior.  They will herd you in to high density housing near mass transit.  Here is the Policy Toolbox, which is really what should be called the “Toolbox of Tyranny”.

Clearly MTC and ABAG are unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who are out of control.  It is critical that people get educated on the One Bay Area Plan and educate their local city officials to object to the One Bay Area Plan.

To get more involved in this process, see www.bayarealiberty.org and join our free email list.

This article was published in Half Way to Concord:

 http://www.halfwaytoconcord.com/mtc-sneaks-vehicle-miles-traveled-tax-one-bay-area-plan/

The Contra Costa Times editorial of July 18 “Car tax idea is out of the box: Put it back!” expressed shock and outrage about “… the creative audacity of Bay Area leaders proposing a per-mile tax on driving, maybe as early as next year, using — wait for it — a GPS-like tracker!”

But what is even more outrageous is the story of how the proposal was slipped into the scoping documents at the last minute. Here’s how MTC sneaked the Vehicle Miles traveled Tax (VMT) into the One Bay Area Plan without any public discussion or hearings on the topic.

The One Bay Area Plan (www.onebayarea.org) is a 25 year plan designed to comply with SB375 Draconion requirements to reduce California Green House Gass (GHG) emissions. In order to accomplish this feat, civil liberties will be surreptitiously weakened while future lifestyle choices will be increasingly limited to “stack and pack housing” on top of retail space near mass transit hubs.

The organizations pushing this agenda are so-called “social equity” groups, specifically Transform CA and Urban Habitat. Under the Sustainable Communities Strategy, governments are required to support the three Es, Economy, Environment, and Equity. There are many non-profit organizations, including Transform and Urban Habitat, who work hand and glove with MTC, and organizations like 4CLE in Contra Costa, to insure the “175% income redistribution”. These stakeholder groups are the pushing for equity and MTC is only too happy to comply since it builds their base of entrenched interests.

So here is what is really happening. The One Bay Area Plan requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and part of that process requires public input for its scoping process, the first step before drafting the report.

MTC held public “visioning sessions” from June 20, 2012 through June 27, 2012 to get guided public “input” culled from a carefully crafted and slanted process designed to reach only one conclusion. MTC took comments from the public regarding input to the One Bay Area EIR scoping strategy. At the time, the public was presented with a set of options to consider.

The Vehicle Miles Traveled Tax (VMT) was never mentioned as part of those discussions.

That set of options can be found here on pages 32 and 33. In fact, on slide 32, Alternative 5 simply discusses transit level service and HOV lanes.

After all public comments were received, MTC added the issue of the VMT. On July 13, after public comments were closed, MTC briefed the Board regarding alternative 5 which now included a discussion of VMT on slide 12.

What happened between the time of public input and the time of presentation to the Board for a vote was that certain favored stakeholder groups, specifically Transform, Public Advocates, and Urban Habitat, submitted this proposal (see page 15 *) that includes:

1. Upzoning would be expanded to more areas in the Bay. This would mean even more requirements for high density housing in cities that do not have their ìfair shareî of low income people.

2. Development fees would be eliminated for affordable housing developments, while subsidies would be used for favored activities.

3. Communities of Concern (read low income and communities of color) would receive funds from these windfall profits that the region would receive

4. Road pricing (TOLLS) would be implemented to reduce driving, although the proposed VMT tax will EXEMPT ALL LOW-INCOME DRIVERS!

The VMT is designed to give favored status to certain groups. These groups represent organizations that want to transfer wealth through the heavy hand of regional government interfering in the housing, transportation and land use market place.

After all public comments were received the MTC and ABAG added the issue of the VMT! On July 19, MTC and ABAG held a special meeting to vote on moving the EIR scoping to the next level (see page 15).

The letter was dated July 9, but public input was not closed until July 11 and did not include mention of a petition that over 1,000 people signed to delay the scoping by 6-12 months.

Between the visioning meetings and the special hearing, MTC inserted the VMT tax option without any public discussion on that particular issue. Basically, they passed the issue by hiding it inside of the overall One Bay Area Plan EIR scoping vote after the fact.

All the money garnered from the VMT will go directly to MTC and their crony socialists to redistribute more and more wealth to the taking class. It sets towns and cities up for lawsuits to enforce the requirements that all areas must have a ìfairî distribution of all income levels.

If you don’t think that One Bay Area Plan will have any impact on your life and wealth, think again. One Bay Area contains eight key “policy levers” that are designed to manipulate your behavior. They will herd you in to high density housing near mass transit. They hope to tax or toll you out of your car. MTC also has Policy Toolbox with incentives and disincentive to enforce compliance. It should be called the “Toolbox of Tyranny“.

Clearly MTC and ABAG are unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who are out of control and controlled by special interest agendas. It is critical that voters get educated on the One Bay Area Plan and educate their local city officials to object to the One Bay Area Plan.

To get more involved in this process, see www.bayarealiberty.org and join our free email list.

Article Published in CA Political News & Views:  http://capoliticalnews.com/2012/07/17/mimi-steel-the-china-syndrome-and-the-meltdown-of-america-2/

Echoing the laments of pundits like Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood recently held that China outpaces the United States in building major transportation infrastructure like high-speed rail because of its authoritarian system.

“The Chinese are more successful [in building infrastructure] because in their country, only three people make the decision. In our country, 3,000 people do, 3 million….In a country where only three people make the decision, they can decide where to put their rail line, get the money, and do it. We don’t do it that way in America.”

Most Americans do not agree with LaHood so our elites have resorted to the stealth version of stifling dissent. These days, it seems that most government entities are offering “visioning” sessions when they want to get “public input”.  Yet these types of sessions are designed to have the opposite effect. They employ a variety of tactics to suppress dissent and limit discussion to favored options in order to ensure that the end result is the appearance of widespread support for a plan that in reality has engendered substantial opposition. Nowhere is this more evident than with the One Bay Area Plan, a 25 year plan that combines housing, transportation and land use.

One Bay Area’s predetermined objective is to impose the template of sustainability and smart growth policies on the 9 counties in the Bay.  The plan is mandated by SB375 which requires public input. The methodology for getting an input with the desired outcome is the use of the Delphi Technique, developed by the RAND Corporation in the 1960s.  The two code words associated with the technique are “visioning” and “consensus”. Visioning is the process that consists of a series of meetings led by a facilitator to get the participants to agree to a predetermined outcome.  Consensus is the process through which objections to a proposal are extinguished.  Consensus is not agreement.  It is the absence of expressed opposition.  For example, a typical goal might be “to preserve open space”.  The facilitator does not ask the group to agree because that might provoke opposition.  Questions such as how much open space, where would it be, how would it be acquired are not allowed.  Instead, the facilitator asks a negative question.  He might ask “Does anyone think we should not preserve open space?”  Anyone who answers yes to this question would look ridiculous and be marginalized by the group.  Negative response questions are designed to eliminate opposition.  The sessions do not allow you to question assumptions.  Here is a composite of a visioning session held in Concord, CA in Spring 2011.  The facilitator states (s)he wants public input but when it is given, it is ignored  or dismissed. www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9FphF5sJwQ

This is the opposite of representative government. Since very few people knowingly would vote to subvert their property rights through smart growth and sustainable development schemes, the bureaucrats and their enablers must resort to stealth and deception through the use of the Delphi Technique.  Visioning and consensus are the tools in their toolbox to herd opinions to a predetermined outcome. Citizens should be aware that when they see calls for “visioning” sessions, they need to realize that they are being manipulated.  They need to learn about the Delphi Technique and take the appropriate counter measures to let the bureaucrats know they will not be herded.

What happened to representative government?  What happened to voting?  What happened to honest and open debate?  Visioning and consensus are deceptive practices which harken to the China syndrome of stifling dissent.  They should have no place in the development of public policies in the United States of America.

*Reference for LaHood quote:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/07/05/obama_s_transportation_secretary_hails_chinese_infrastructure?roi=echo3-12503592178-9092359-8a764cf04a5eff0e3d94bf7f9fedb207

Article published in CA Political News and Views:  http://capoliticalnews.com/2012/07/16/mimi-steel-the-china-syndrome-and-the-meltdown-of-america/

In the 1979 movie, The China Syndrome a reporter discovers safety problems at a nuclear plant that, in a fictionalized worst-case scenario, could result in a nuclear meltdown, where reactor components melt through their containment structures and into the underlying earth, “all the way to China”.

In America today, we have a meltdown of core American values such as individual liberty and freedom of movement and association “all the way down” to the values of China such as authoritarian decisions of where and how people should live with no input from the public.

Last year President Barack Obama reportedly told associates that “it would be much easier to be the president of China,” noting that no one dares to express public criticism of the words of President Hu Jintao.

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman expressed a similar admiration for the unlimited authority of China’s totalitarian regime. While noting that he prefers America’s democracy, Friedman wished America could be “China for a day.” China’s system enables it “to authorize the right solutions … on everything from the economy to environment.”

The desire for unlimited authority and the power to silence opponents seems to be a common trait of those who aspire to control virtually every aspect of the lives of their fellow citizens. Invariably, their desire for unlimited authority is based on good intentions. They and those who share their preferences know what is best for the rest of us. Unfortunately, the checks and balances of our system – including the “negative liberties,” as President Obama describes the constitutional limitations on government power – stand in their way.

Nowhere is the desire for unrestrained power more on display than in the push for “Plan Bay Area,” a 25-year master plan to centralize control over housing, transportation, and land use policies throughout the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area under the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Steve Heminger, MTC executive director, regretfully conceded in a May 2010 memorandum that he lacked authority to implementdraconian  steps such as “moving 200,000 people, over and above current projections, in 2035 to San Francisco to better match jobs with workers; [or] alternatively, we remove a like number of people in several suburban counties that have much higher jobs/housing imbalances.”

Hemingerlusts for the kind of authority that would enable him to relocate people on a larger scale than the program that sent more than 110,000 Japanese-American citizens into relocation camps in 1942. His motives, of course, are pure. He would move his fellow citizens, not into crowded barracks surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, but instead to high-density, “stack-and-pack” apartments in urban cores where we could rely on public transit, bicycles, or our own two feet to move about.

Heminger noted that achievement of his far-reaching plans to dictate policies for housing, transportation, and land use throughout the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area will require the colloboration of other unelected bureaucracies, such as the California Area Resources Board (CARB) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), to adopt coercive policies that punish private use of automobiles, put the cost of single-family housing out of reach of most citizens, and waive environmental requirements for projects allegedly designed to mitigate environmental issues.

Among the alternative scenarios suggested to implement Plan Bay Area is a proposal to “eliminate inter-regional commute.” Implicit in this idea is prohibiting anyone living outside the nine Bay Area counties from working within the region. Assuming the plan could somehow evade the constitutional protections on citizens’ right to travel, it is hard to imagine how such a scheme could be implemented. Would they set up militarized checkpoints on every street, road, and highway that crosses county lines?

As frightening as Plan Bay Area itself is, it is even more alarming to see the meltdown of core American values by those who are sworn to uphold the Constitution yet aspire to control so many aspects of our daily lives.

Article published in Half Way to Concord:  http://www.halfwaytoconcord.com/one-bay-area-plan-mtc-hopes-to-displace-200000-bay-area-residents/

The One Bay Area Plan or Plan Bay Area is a 25 year plan that includes housing, transportation, and land use based on the requirements of California law SB375. The plan calls for massive centralized command and control on how Bay Area residents will live in the coming decades. In fact, elite bureaucrats actually dream about moving more than 200,000 people from the East Bay to San Francisco!

But a petition, sponsored by SFBay CAPR, has forced bureaucrats to finally acknowledge that, “Significant concerns exist about the legitimacy, impacts, and influence of Plan Bay Area.” See what Plan Bay Area is really about and how to stop it.

Plan Bay Area will force development of stack and pack housing along mass transit corridors. It proposes all communities have a government mandated mixture of income levels and housing prices. It would severely restrict automobile usage. Toll Roads will be everywhere, while increased spending will be used to create inefficient public transit that will cost billions in new taxes.

Concerned citizens, who have been registering their objections to the plan since public meetings started in April 2011, have been largely ignored until a petition drive, sponsored by SFBay CAPR, yielded over 1,000 signatures protesting the Plan. The sponsors of the Plan, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) can no longer white wash legitimate citizen concerns.   MTC’s admission of serious opposition to its plan for seizing Bay Area development in the coming years could end up being a serious understatement based on the revelation of a document recently discovered by a property rights watchdog in Napa.

The nine Bay Area counties impacted by Plan Bay Area include seven million people. Please understand how dangerous this centralized plan is: take a moment and read the words of Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in a May 17, 2010 memorandum to the California Air Resources Board (CARB).   Heminger regretfully conceded that he lacked authority to implement draconian steps such as “moving 200,000 people, over and above current projections, in 2035 to San Francisco to better match jobs with workers; [or] alternatively, we remove a like number of people in several suburban counties that have much higher jobs/housing imbalances.”

These elitists lust for the kind of authority that would enable them to relocate citizens on a larger scale than the program that sent more than 110,000 Japanese-American citizens into relocation camps in 1942. Their motives, of course, are pure. Given the power they desire, they would move us, not into crowded barracks surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, but instead to dray high-density, “stack-and-pack” apartments in “projects” located in urban cores where we would be compelled to rely on public transit, bicycles, or our own two feet to move about.

‘Move or Remove’ – excuse me, but when did anyone vote for this let alone realize that this was a hidden agenda perpetrated in the name of meeting greenhouse gas targets mandated by SB 375?   Only the active involvement of citizens will stop the power grab of unelected bureaucrats like Steve Heminger. Here are three actions Bay Area citizens can take to help win this battle:

Go to our website www.bayarealiberty.org to learn more about Plan Bay Area and how to become involved. Forward this information to friends and neighbors and urge them to make their voices heard. Send us your ideas and suggestions on other actions we can take together to stop this insidious plan, sfinfo@proprights.org .

Bay Area Citizens must resist Move or Remove

Local City Governments (and therefore any concept of self-government) will become irrelevant if One Bay Area Plan is adopted.

Two key messages for your Local City Council:

1.  Just say NO to One Bay Area grants–accepting grant money comes with draconian strings attached that lock your city in to commitments for high density housing near mass transit hubs.  This may be great for major metropolitan areas like San Francisco and Oakland but it will be devestating for small communities like Saratoga, Los Gatos and more rural small towns all around the Bay.

JUST SAY

NO

to One Bay Area Grants**

**Tell your city you do NOT want them to apply for this grant money.  It comes with strings that bind you to stack and pack and transit centers

2.  Encourage your City Council to write a letter to MTC-ABAG in support of Option 1-NO PROJECT

There will be a special meeting of the MTC-ABAG Board to determine if they will approve the EIR scoping and move to the next step.  We really need people to attend the meeting and express their point that this must be delayed.

Here are the 5 scenarios. Your first point should be about DELAY.  Your second point should be that the only acceptable alternative is number 1–NO PLAN–Local governments should control, not regional.

Note:  Every alternative except  Alternative  #1, NO PLAN  involves some degree of cohersion in terms of fees and incentives and more taxes.  Alternative 1 supports existing General Plans that are the LOCAL PLANS–We Want Local Control

Regional Government is NOT Self Government