Agenda 21 Documentation For The Mayodan Town Council

Brian D.
Hill
Digitally signed by Brian D. Hill DN: cn=Brian D. Hill, o=USWGO Alternative News and Political Action Center, ou=Public Records division of USWGO Alternative News, email=admin@uswgo.com, c=US Date: 2012.03.12 12:19:42 -04'00'
For the entire Mayodan Town Council and the Town Attorney Philip Berger,
Documentation & References on Agenda 21, ICLEI, NAFTA Super Highway, and Trans-Texas corridor
This Documentation is submitted to the Town of Mayodan clerk right on March 12, 2012 and is in relevance with the Town of Mayodan, under the facts that Agenda 21 threatens the town of Mayodan, and is in relevance with the Public Comment by Mr. Brian D. Hill the admin/founder of USWGO Alternative News. This documentation is provided as a informer to educate the town council on the dangers of Agenda 21, ICLEI's involvement, the NAFTA Super Highway, and the Trans-Texas corridor thanks to the interview of Dr. Michael Coffman, Ph.D., and documents collected and is in USWGO Records. Please make copies to every town councilperson and even the town attorney and state senator Philip. E. Berger as this issue affects the state as well. This is all the documentation I was able to produce but some documentation is well over 300 pages long which won't just be expensive for me to produce but also cost the town a good fortune as well to make copies so I will only reference the links to documents with large pages for the town council to investigate on their own. The documentation with not many pages will be included and attached to these set of documents on Agenda 21 to back up my 3-minute speech at the Public Comment period around March 12th 2012. Sincerely, Brian D. Hill USWGO.COM admin@uswgo.com DISCLAIMER:
All documentation printouts from newspaper articles and other forms of copyrighted material are provided to the Town of Mayodan and to the Internet for the preservation of the documentation given to the Town of Mayodan to be on the Public Record for official governmental purposes and is compliant with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 Fair Use Exemptions under the 1976 Copyright Act now known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. USWGO makes no money off of any informational material, and USWGO intends No harm from any information referenced and included within this document and attached documents to the town of Mayodan. USWGO releases this information only for informational, educational, news reporting, political, and public records purposes. Any lawsuits against USWGO will be viewed as a violation of their rights to expose the truth, rights provided under Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and the 1st and 10th Amendment rights. It is not an act of piracy to print documentation from newspapers and news sites to give to the Town of Mayodan. For this case, Copyright Infringement lawsuits are nullified through the North Carolina State Constitution Article I Section 15. Education. The people have a right to the privilege of education, and it is the duty of the State to guard and maintain that right. Any copyright infringement lawsuit and AntiPiracy attack is considered an attack on USWGO Educating the masses therefore nullified under the U.S. Constitution; Bill of Rights; 10th Amendment which guarantees states rights against Federal and United Nations anti-sovereign oppression. Any copyright lawsuits against USWGO or Brian D. Hill shall guarantee repercussions in the form of a counter-lawsuit against the plaintiffs and who they represent. We put this disclaimer due to what Righthaven LLC attempted last year with their lawsuit over a posting against the TSA Agents. All rights to educate Government officials including County, Town/City, State, and National are protected and reserved by USWGO; Fair Use Doctrine; NC Constitution Art. I Sec 15;
1st Amendment Free Speech and Freedom of the Press. See here for explanation to why we threaten counter-lawsuits against copyright enforcement organizations: http://www.wxii12.com/news/26956369/detail.html
Table of Contents: (1)Agenda 21 Documentation (a)Taking Liberty - How private Property in America is being abolished, By Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D. (6 Pages) (b)Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21: Selling Texas to foreigners, jabs Obama for same (Examiner.com) (3 Pages) (c)Understanding Sustainable Development - Agenda 21 - For the people and their Public Officials (14 Pages) (2)NAFTA Superhighway (a)House Concurrent Resolution 40; 110th Congress 1st Session; NAFTA Superhighway (4 Pages) (b)House Concurrent Resolution 487; 109th Congress 2D Session; NAFTA Superhighway (3 Pages) (c)SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 387; 2007 session; Virginia Government; NAFTA Superhighway (2 Pages (d)The NAFTA Superhighway; Congressman Ron Paul's Official Government website (paul.house.gov )
(1 Page)
(e)Congressman Paul Opposes NAFTA Superhighway; Congressman Ron Paul's Official Government website (paul.house.gov ) (1 Page) (3)Trans-Texas Corridor (a)Local toll authority wins bid against Spanish firm in North Texas Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (b)Much ado about nothing: Texas transportation overhaul bill dies Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (c)Spanish firm using loan from U.S. to build segments of Texas toll road Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (d)Regional council prefers Texas public agency to build toll road Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (e)Texas transportation overhaul bill still in the works Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (f)Public hearing, protest rally center on Trans-Texas Corridor Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (g)TxDOT says Trans-Texas Corridor is dead Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (h)Trans-Texas Corridor draws public comments, outcry Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (i)Spanish company lands four infrastructure projects Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (4)Reference Materials
Agenda 21 Documentation
(a)Taking Liberty - How private Property in America is being abolished, By Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D. (6 Pages) (b)Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21: Selling Texas to foreigners, jabs Obama for same (Examiner.com) (3 Pages) (c)Understanding Sustainable Development - Agenda 21 - For the people and their Public Officials (14 Pages) Total 23 Pages of Documentation and print-outs from at least 1 news website.
TAKING LIBERTY
How private property in America is being abolished. By Michael S. Coffman, Ph.D. All maps (except for Wildlands Project map, below) created by Environmental Perspectives, Inc., produced and funded by American Land Foundation and Stewards of the Range.
One hour before the U.S. Senate was to adopt the United Nations Treaty on Biodiversity, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) went to the floor with a 300-plus-page draft copy of Chapter 10 of the United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment and a 4x6 poster.
The poster showed the lower 48 states overlaid with hundreds of red islands representing wilderness areas interconnected by thousands of red ribbons called corridors, all surrounded by yellow buffer zones. Small green patches were human occupation zones. The agenda was so outrageous it would have been discounted, except that Sen. Hutchinson had the proof in her hands. The date was Sept. 29, 1994, and the agenda was called the Wildlands Project. Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-ME), along with several other senators, withdrew the scheduled cloture vote on the treaty and a vote was never taken. That should have been the end of it, but in reality it was only the beginning. Follow the Money While environmental concerns may be legitimate in some cases, many of the accusations made by environmental nongovernment organizations (NGOs) today are nothing more than perceptions created to indoctrinate the public and cause unfounded fear that
SIMULATED RESERVE AND CORRIDOR SYSTEM TO PROTECT BIODIVERSITY AS MANDATED BY THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, THE WILDLANDS PROJECT, UNITED NATIONS AND U.S. MAN AND THE BIOSPHERE PROGRAM, AND VARIOUS U.N. AND U.S. HERITAGE PROGRAMS
Core Reserves and Corridors: little to no human use Buffer Zones: highly regulated use Border 21/La Paz Sidebar Agreement of NAFTA: 120-mile-wide international zone of cooperation Normal Use Indian Reservations Military Reservations
Taken from: The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8a-e; United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment, Section 13.3.2.2.3; US Man and the Biosphere Strategic Plan, UN/US Heritage Corridor Program, The Wildlands Project, WildEarth, 1992.
30
RANGE MAGAZINE FALL 2005
generates income for the NGO. Environmental fear has become a multibillion-dollar business that preys on unknowing urbanites. Seventy-seven percent of all Americans live in about three percent of Americas land area classed as urban by the U.S. Bureau of Census. The number only climbs to a little over six percent when all developed areas are included. Activist NGOs have found it easy to leverage legitimate environmental concerns into profitable campaigns that have marginal
property. James Madison and others even claimed that the entire purpose of government is to protect private property. They knew that private property is the foundation to liberty and wealth creation. Hernando de Soto, a Peruvian citizen, completed a massive study for the World Bank in the early 2000s, the findings of which were published in The Mystery of Capital. De Sotos team studied many nations for several years to determine why capitalism tri-
found that it takes 10 to 20 years and many payoffs to register property ownership in these countries. Hence, impoverished citizens do not register their ownership so their property rights are not legally established. De Soto calls this real but unregistered property dead capital because its equity is not available for investment. No equity means no capital to build wealth. Since citizens cannot build wealth, neither can the nation, condemned to perpetual poverty no
URBAN AREAS IN THE UNITED STATES
Area classified as urban by U.S. Bureau of Census

The U.S. Bureau of Census reports that 77 percent of all American citizens are jammed into 3 percent of the land called urban areas. Nearly 94 percent of the U.S. is still classified as undeveloped rural area.
or negative environmental benefits. Why Property Rights Matter Because urbanites out-vote rural residents by a 3-to-1 margin, they can pass laws that harm rural residents in the belief we need more government land and open space. Yet, most environmental laws strip rural citizens of their ability to use proven management practices to provide goods and services to urbanites. As a result, groceries, appliances, lumber and other commodities cost more. The higher cost of goods and services is not the most dangerous threat to America. Our founding fathers recognized the critical nature of private property rights as they were firsthand witnesses to the abuse of power that occurs when government controls private
umphs in the West and fails in Third World nations. He found that strong property rights are the basis of liberty and wealth creation just as was claimed by Americas founding fathers. For instance, equity loans on personal homes provide the funding for 70 percent of all small business starts in the United States. Small businesses are the economic backbone of America. This would not be possible without strong property rights. In turn, unencumbered legal property rights allow banks the security needed to make the loan in a few days or weeks. This is not the case in Third World nations. Because of arbitrary regulations and corresponding corruption, de Soto
matter how many socialist income-redistribution plans are imposed by the United Nations. Manipulating Property Value Loss of liberty to faceless bureaucrats who use a corrupt and arbitrary regulatory system to their own advantage is happening to more and more rural citizens in the United States. Rural citizens are not alone. A growing number of communities are faced with arbitrary regulations under the umbrella of smart growth and urban-growth boundaries. Depending on who draws the arbitrary boundary, low-value agricultural land can instantly be worth millions. Immediately across the urban-growth boundary, these arbitrary regulations prohibit development
FALL 2005 RANGE MAGAZINE
31
and the value of the land remains low. Within 100 yards, one landowner reaps millions and another gets nothing. Arbitrary regulation no matter how noble the intentalways breeds corruption. Studies conducted by the Harvard Institute of Economic Research clearly show this enormous economic impact. Quarter-acre lots in cities with minimum smart-growth regulations average $10,000 to $40,000 per lot, while similar lots in cities imposing heavy smart-growth regulations average $200,000 to $600,000 per lot. There is a strong correlation between the time it takes to get a permit and the cost of the land, just as de Soto found in Third World nations. Harvard economists Edward L. Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko, in their paper The
where people can live where they choose and travel freely, to a Wildlands-dominated landscape where people live in designated population centers with limited travel allowed through highly restricted corridors. The Wildlands Project is the master plan for both the United Nations Agenda 21 and Biodiversity Treaty. In classic socialist utopian idealism, Agenda 21 defines how every human being must live in order to save mother earth. The Wildlands Project represents a grandiose design to transform at least half the land area of the continental United States into an immense eco-park cleansed of modern industry and private property. Wildlands Project coauthor Reed Noss explains their intent: The collective needs of nonhuman species must take precedence over
FOR ANYONE WHO DOUBTS THAT ENVIRONMENTALISTS ARE SERIOUS ABOUT DESTROYING PRIVATE PROPERTY IN AMERICA, REDISTRIBUTING THE WEALTH, AND REDUCING THE USE OF OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, THOSE DOUBTS SHOULD BE PUT TO REST. THEY ARE MORE THAN HALFWAY THERE.
Impact of Zoning on Housing Affordability (March 2002), emphasized that the entire increase was due to smart-growth regulations. These feel-good regulations represent a huge drag on future urban economy. Little did I know when I prepared the map Sen. Hutchinson used on the Senate floor, that environmental operatives were already in key positions of our government, ready to implement the antiproperty rights directives of the United Nations Treaty on Biodiversity. Although the treaty did not pass the Senate, they were able to shift gears, developing the authority necessary to implement the Wildlands agenda under an administrative cloak that didnt require congressional approval. It has been just over 10 years since they actively began transforming America into a Wildlands. What is most frightening is how much they have accomplished in that short period. For anyone who doubts that environmentalists are serious about destroying private property in America, redistributing the wealth, and reducing the use of our natural resources, those doubts should be put to rest. They are more than halfway there. The Wildlands Project Under the Wildlands Project, the United States would be transformed from a land
32
the needs and desires of humans. Federal Programs While many key laws like the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Clean Water Act and dozens of others that would facilitate implementation of the Wildlands agenda were already in place, environmentalists needed to identify areas that had no protection in order to begin converting land to conform to their agenda. The Clinton administration undertook two major programs with no congressional oversight during the 1990s to identify and begin targeting these areas. They were the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) and the Roadless Area Rule. The GAP process starts by analyzing existing protected government land, then overlays geographical data of vegetation habitat, animal distribution and property ownership. Land ownership is further divided into stewardship classes: (1) is fully protected (such as wilderness areas); (2) is mostly protected (national parks and many wildlife refuges); (3) is partially protected (national landmarks and multiple use areas like U.S. Forest Service lands); and (4) is no known land protection (usually private land). Classes 1 and 2 are often combined. Although GAP sounds innocent, even noble, it is designed for the sole purpose of
defining where gaps exist between already protected areas and those that require protection. These gaps are huge in Midwestern and Eastern states where very little government land exists. Federal, state or local governments already own over 40 percent of the land area in the United States; however, most of this federally owned land is in the West. The only way to close these gaps is by taking private property through condemnation, conservation easements or uncompensated regulations. In most cases, access to this land represents a rural familys livelihood and GAP represents a direct threat to their way of life. The second federal program implemented at the end of the Clinton administration is the U.S. Forest Service Roadless Area Conservation Rule (RA). RA established blanket, nationwide prohibitions generally limiting timber harvest, road construction and reconstruction within 58.5 million acres of inventoried roadless areas on national forests and grasslands. The lives of thousands of people depend on these historically available resources for their living in forestry, livestock production and mining for critically needed minerals. This was one of the first major efforts to convert already restricted government lands into Wildlands status, and accelerated the process of extinguishing the use of private lands within these areas. On July 14, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming issued a permanent injunction and set aside the roadless rule. However, the U.S. Forest Service issued a new rule on May 5, 2005, that allows the roadless rule to be imposed with the permission of the governor of each state. Already existing laws such as the ESA have made it easier for environmentalists to push their Wildlands agenda. By threatening landowners with species listings or habitat designations, they can force private property owners into signing conservation easements, or into giving away a large portion of their property to the government or to a land trust as mitigation in order to use just a small portion of their land. Taking Liberty in Northwest The government owns 60 percent of Oregon and 42 percent of Washington, so the immediate focus in the Pacific Northwest has been to complete the conversion of these lands into Wildlands and target the private lands within these areas. The ESA has so far been the biggest tool for accomplishing this goal. The designation of the spotted owl gave the environmentalists the surrogate they needed. The spotted owls habitat occupies everything
AREAS IDENTIFIED AS GAP CLASSES 1 & 2 PROTECTED WILDLANDS AND DESIGNATED ROADLESS AREAS ON U.S. FOREST SERVICE LAND
Privately owned Federally owned Indian Reservations State and Locally owned Environmental NGO owned GAP 1 & 2 protected Wildlands Roadless Areaspossible future Wildlands
west of the Cascade mountain ranges centerline, which includes large tracts of private property. The intention was never to save the bird, but to make ghost towns out of entire communities. The federal government, State of Oregon and environmental NGOs collaborated to completely shut down agriculture in the Klamath Basin of south-central Oregon in 2001. Federal agents misrepresented the amount of water needed for endangered suckerfish in Klamath Lake, resulting in the loss of all irrigation water to farmers in the basin and turning farmland into dustbowls. The environmental NGOs fulfilled their mission. Even though their land essentially became worthless, the State of Oregon did nothing to help the farmers. Thousands of Klamath residents lost their jobs, and businesses that supported farming faced financial ruin. Later that summer, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the data supporting the court decision and found no clear evidence that high lake levels benefited the fish or convincing scientific justification for not allowing the farmers to continue to use the
ENDANGERED SPECIES BY COUNTY

56 species or species groups out of more than 1,200 endangered species
Many counties have more than one species listed in their county even though only one species is shown on the map.
33
LAND OWNERSHIP IN OREGON/WASHINGTON
LAND CONTROL IN SPOTTED OWL HABITAT
Most people are unaware that 60 percent of Oregon and 42 percent of Washington are owned by the federal, state or local government.
Private Land Federal Land
Indian Reservations State & Local Land
Spotted Owl Habitat
The endangered spotted owl was used by environmental NGOs and wildlife biologists to shut down much of the logging in western Oregon and Washington even though it was later determined that the owl thrived in second-growth forests.
water for irrigation. In fact, evidence showed that the suckerfish seemed to do better when the farmers used the lake water for irrigation. In reality, an arbitrary ESA decision based on highly questionable science brought economic devastation to an entire region. On the eastern side of the Cascade Mountain Range, the federal GAP analysis showed that large tracts of land were already protected or nearly protected, but there were still many ranchers, miners and foresters who used these lands and held legitimate property rights. A concerted effort was made through the Clinton administration to begin the transformation of this region through the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project in 1993. The project attempted to develop cooperative management strategies between federal, state and local governments to control land use over the 64-million-acre Columbia Basin Ecosystem east of the Cascade mountains into Idaho, western Montana and northwest Wyoming. Citizens strongly opposed it and in 2003, after a 10-year study, only federal agencies and NGOs continued the program. Individuals living within populated areas of the Northwest are also beginning to feel the effects of the Wildlands agenda to move urban growth into designated human occupation zones. For example, in 1979 planners
34
drew an Urban Growth Boundary line around Portland, Ore., to control urban sprawl. Land values within the smart-growth boundary skyrocketed. Land values outside plummeted. Smart growth causes severe economic hardship. In 1990, two out of three families could afford a home in the Portland area. That figure dove to one out of three by 2000. The problem became so bad that in 2004 the citizens of Oregon overwhelmingly passed Measure 37, requiring just compensation for landowners suffering from smartgrowth regulations and other land-control restrictions. Taking Liberty in Southeast Except for parts of Florida and the southern Appalachians, the Southeast generally has very little federal, state and local government land that activists can use to lobby for creating Wildlands. So, to speed the process up and help identify private land for Wildlands protection, Region 4 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the University of Floridas GeoPlan Center conducted a GAP analysis called the Southeastern Ecological Framework Project in 1999-2000. The project prioritized ecological areas in the Southeast that need protection. Because GAP gives such a high priority to ecosystems over people, more than 60 percent of the
Southeastnearly all rural areas and private landwas identified as having a high protection priority. Florida has already undertaken a number of statewide initiatives to implement the Wildlands Project under a variety of names, of which the Greenways Planning Project and Save Our Rivers Program are the largest. During the 1990s these programs were under the umbrella of the Preservation 2000 Act, changed by the Florida Legislature in 2000 to Florida Forever. The goal was to place as much as 80 percent of Florida into Wildlands reserves and corridors, which they call hubs and linkages. By 1999, Florida had purchased 1.3 million acres through the Save Our Rivers Program. After 2000, the same program targeted new lands for acquisition by green-lining a huge area of land. Green-lining typically locks the land value at rock-bottom prices, denying the landowner any chance for receiving highest and best value for his land, thereby skimming the landowners equity for the government. By 2005, Florida had purchased another 800,000 acres throughout the state increasing state ownership from 29 to 37 percent. The state used conservation easements to acquire development rights on an additional 315,000 acres at about one-third the cost of
WILDLANDS PROPOSALS BY NGOs

Federal Land Indian Reservations GAP Protected 1&2 Roadless Areas State & Local Land Spotted Owl Habitat ICBEMP NGO Proposed Wildlands During the Clinton administration all land east of the Cascade Mountain Range of Oregon and Washington was classified as the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Program (ICBEMP) ostensibly to develop ecosystem management strategies that would protect the core values of nature. However, other places where this approach has been used, such as the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area or the Adirondack State Park in upstate New York, reveal that all property rights come under the control of government bureaucracies. The Defenders of Wildlife have proposed additional areas to be included as GAP 1&2 Wildlands in Oregon.
SOUTHEASTERN ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK PROJECT
Priority Ecological Areas Significant Ecological Areas
In 1999-2000 the Environmental Protection Agency and University of Florida conducted a study of GAP and other data called The Southeastern Ecological Framework Project. The project attempted to prioritize ecological areas in the Southeast that wildlands ecologists believe need protection. Sixty percent of the eight states received a high priority or significant status for protection. The final resulsts of the SEFP delineated 43 percent of the eight-state area as qualifying as hubs or linkage status. Of this, only 9 percent was already protected while 52 percent is privately owned uplands that have to be acquired or condemned.
what the state would have had to pay to buy the land outright. The landowners often sell the easement for quick cash, figuring the land will never have much future value. Or the landowner sells the easement because regulations have made it increasingly difficult to make a living on or to otherwise use the land. Florida is cannibalizing its private land in the name of protecting nature. It is not the only state in the East that is doing so. Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Rhode Island and New York are also following closely in Floridas footsteps. These states are also identifying greenway hubs and linkages for the Wildlands Project. Taking Liberty Local communities will always need regulations that focus on true harm, nuisance and public health. A healthy economy is required to protect the environment. If the local, state or U.S. economy declines because arbitrary regulations limit or remove private property from production, it is highly probable that the very efforts to protect the environment will eventually cause its decline. The end result will not be the eco-utopia the greens envision. It will be a land owned by government and elite land trusts. In truth, the Wildlands agenda is not about whether Americas land and resources will be used for human benefit; it is about who will own them. Private property rights are as important to the environment as they are to people. s
Dr. Michael Coffman is president of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., in Bangor, Maine. He has a Ph.D. in forest sciences and has taught and conducted research in ecosystem classification, global warming and acid rain for 25 years before founding Environmental Perspectives. He can be reached at 207-945-9878.
FLORIDA PRIVATE LAND ACQUISITIONS SINCE EARLY 1990s

Federal Land State Land NGO Land GAP Status 1&2 Private Land Acquisitions
Taking Liberty on the Web!

Taking Liberty is a sophisticated Web-based animated program with narrations and stunning visuals showing the progress environmentalists have made and what programs they are using in their efforts to implement the radical Wildlands agenda. It is funded and produced by the American Land Foundation in Taylor, Texas, and Stewards of the Range in Meridian, Idaho. The program can be viewed at <www.takingliberty.us>. CDs of the program can also be purchased on the Web site or by calling 1-800-452-6389. They are $15 each; 4-9 for $12 each; and 10 or more for $10 each. The maps shown in this article (a few of many) and in the program are also available for purchase.
GOAL
Future Wildland Hubs & Linkages Since the 1990s the Florida Preservation 2000 and the Florida Forever Programs have acquired over three million acres (11.5 percent) of private land to be included in the Greenways Project.
35
Rick Perry tied to Agenda 21: Selling Texas to foreigners, jabs Obama for...
http://www.examiner.com/transportation-policy-in-san-antonio/rick-perry-...
1 of 3
3/7/2012 4:08 AM
job as Perrys aide, steers the $7 billion corridor P3 to his former employer Cintra,
2 of 3
3/7/2012 4:08 AM
3 of 3
3/7/2012 4:08 AM
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21
Presented as a public service from:
For the People and their Public Officials

Prepared by
Fr eedom A dvocates
Recognize Unalienable R ights
w w w.Freedom Advocates.org
Table of Contents:
What is Sustainable Development? ............................. 2
Historical Development and Origins The Antithetical Foundations of Liberty and Sustainable Development
Introduction
You may have heard people talking about Sustainable Development in public meetings, on television and on the radio. Consultants talk about it, university professors lecture on it, and at all levels of government, it is now being mandated. But what is Sustainable Development? That is precisely the question this guide is intended to address. In the following pages, you will read of the origins of Sustainable Development, its theoretical underpinnings, its major programs, and how it is implemented. When you have finished reading this document, you will have the knowledge necessary to begin identifying the vast array of Sustainable Development programs that exist and continue to arise. Please recognize this document for what it is: a unique opportunity to learn more about Sustainable Development. Then you can make a difference in your community by supporting present and future actions that restore and protect the rights and well-being of you, your family, and your fellow citizens. More information on the nature and consequences of Sustainable Development is available from Freedom Advocates. (http://www.FreedomAdvocates.org)
Implementing Sustainable Development ..................... 6

Equity: Using the Law to Restructure Human Nature Economy: The International Redistribution of Wealth and the Creation of Public/Private Partnerships Environment: Nature Above Man Educating the Youth to Mold the Minds of Tomorrow Stakeholder Councils Restructuring American Government Funding Sources Political Support
Sustainable Development Land Use Programs ......... 16

The Wildlands Network Smart Growth The North American Union and the Trans-Texas Corridor Abusing Eminent Domain to Promote Public/Private Partnerships
What You Can Do ...................................................... 22

6 Practical Steps to Restore and Protect Liberty
Freedom Advocates P.O. Box 3330 Freedom, CA 95019 831.684.2232 Fourth Printing (Revised) - 2004, 2005, 2007, 2010
SM
Freedom Advocates is a 501(c)(3) public benef it cor poration. Your tax deductible contribution is valuable for the continuation of our work.
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 known as the Rio Earth Summit, where more than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21, and pledged to evaluate progress made in implementing the plan every five years thereafter. President George H. W. Bush was the signatory for the United States. Although Congress never authorized the implementation of Agenda 21 2 (as a soft-law policy recommendation 3 not a treaty it needs no Image 1: The United Nations website clearly ratification), in 1993, displays Agenda 21 documents President Bill Clinton established, by Executive Order, the Presidents Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) for the purpose of implementing Agenda 21 in the United States. The
2. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) submitted a resolution (H.J. Res. 166) to the 103rd Congress on March 29, 1993 urging the President and Congress to assume a strong leadership role in implementing the decisions made at the Earth Summit by developing a national strategy to implement Agenda 21 and other Earth Summit agreements.... Though that bill stalled in the Subcommittee on Economic Policy, Trade and Environment, its recommendations have been implemented through various actions by the President, and Congress. 3. Soft law policy is not binding. This is a common procedure in the U.N.s policy development strategy. Soft law documents are quite often followed by treaties or covenants, which are binding international law; alternately, soft law can find immediate application through local legislation or policy without an internationally binding agreement. 3
What is Sustainable Development?

The most common definition of Sustainable Development given by its proponents is a statement found in the Bruntland Report, Our Common Future, released during the 1987 United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development: Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Historical Development and Origins

Even the term sustainable must be defined, since on the surface it appears to be inherently positive. In reality, Sustainable Development has become a buzz term that refers to a political agenda, rather than an objectively sustainable form of development. Specifically, it refers to an initiative of the United Nations (U.N.) called Sustainable Development Agenda 21. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is a comprehensive statement of a political ideology that is being progressively infused into every level of government in America. Known around the world simply as Agenda 21, this initiative is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally, and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts (sic) on the environment. 1 Agenda 21 was unveiled in 1992 during the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), commonly
1. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm 2
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 PCSD operated through 1999, but its actions to promote Sustainable Development have taken root, and now exert an increasing influence in communities across America. International organizations such as the U.N., and its accredited Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), generally consider Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 to be synonymous. Therefore, in order to avoid confusion and equivocation, Sustainable Development will be the term used throughout this document to refer to both. Agenda 21 will only be used to refer to the actual document from the Rio Earth Summit. At times, the political agenda embodied in Sustainable Development is implemented under other names for purposes of political expediency. J. Gary Lawrence, a planner for the city of Seattle, and advisor to the Presidents Council on Sustainable Development, said in 1998, that, Participating in a U.N. advocated planning process would very likely bring out many ... who would actively work to defeat any elected official ... undertaking Local Agenda 21. So we will call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management, or smart growth. 4
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 The institution of private property was understood by those who participated in the American Experiment 5 and its principles were consequently included in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. 6 The right to property as outlined in those documents is premised on an owners determination of its use, provided that such use does not disturb the equal rights of another. all Menare endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. The Declaration of Independence
Which Philosophy of Rights?

Nature Source
Purpose of government
Individual Rights
Community Rights
U.S. Declaration of Independence U.N. Declaration of Human Rights
Protect the natural or unalienable rights of each individual That all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights...
Control the individual for the greater good of a global community Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations Government grants, restricts or withdraws your rights according to its needs. You and the product of your labor belong to the community.
2007 FREEDOMADVOCATES
The Antithetical Foundations of Liberty and Sustainable Development

Property must be secured, or liberty cannot exist. John Adams It has long been known that liberty is tied to the institution of private property. The Decalogue codified private property in four words: Thou shalt not steal. Private property and freedom are inseparable. George Washington
4. Lawrence, J. Gary, The Future of Local Agenda 21 in the New Millennium, The Millennium Papers, UNED-UK, Issue 2, (1998), 3. 4
In short
Youre born with rights, government exists to protect them. You and the product of your labor belong to you.
5. Soapes, Emily Williams. The American Experiment: Living with the Constitution. Prologue: Journal of the National Archives 19, no.3 (Fall 1987): 185-189. 6. See also Machan, Tibor, Private Rights & Public Illusions, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick (1995). 5
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 In contrast to the unalienable rights found in Americas founding documents, the United Nations Charter and the Declaration of Human Rights are based on a very different idea: rights are granted and rescinded by men. The Sustainable Development political agenda originates in the founding documents of the United Nations. This isnt surprising, since the myriad of countries represented in the drafting of Agenda 21 have widely divergent forms of government, and must have a point of agreement (a least common denominator) to rally around and the U.N. Charter provides that point. However, for progress to be made in implementing Sustainable Development in the United States, unalienable rights such as the right to property must be eroded, attacked, and struck down altogether. 7, 8
Environment
Equity
Economy
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Implementing Sustainable Development

The authors of Agenda 21 have said it will affect every area of life, grouped according to three objectives: Equity, Economy, and Environment (known commonly as the 3 Es). By defining these terms vaguely, a litany of abuses have resulted. Furthermore, by rubber-stamping pre-conceived plans, using manipulative visioning sessions to garner the appearance of public buy-in, and acquiring grants from sources with questionable motives, the entire process of implementing Sustainable Development policies is suspect.
7. Nullification of the right to the reasonable use of ones property affects by extension the right to private action and the freedom of expression. Shaw, Michael, What is Private Property? Liberty Garden (2003). 8. Heywood, V.H. (ed.). Global Biodiversity Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995): 767, 782. This document likewise condemns inappropriate social structures (p 763), golf courses (p 970), and the attitudes toward nature found in Judeo-ChristianIslamic religions (pp 766, 838). 6
Equity:
Using the Law to Restructure Human Nature
The authors of the Sustainable Development action plan recognized that their environmental and economic objectives, and the corresponding transformation of the American system of equal justice to a system of "social" justice, are radically divergent from the views and objectives of the average person. Therefore, in order to achieve their objectives, they call for a shift in attitudes that can be seen in the educational programs developed by its proponents. This is the premise of Sustainable Development: That individual human wants, needs and desires are to be conformed to the views and dictates of planners. Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chair of the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), and Clerk of the Circuit and County Court in Miami-Dade County, Florida, has said that individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective in the process of implementing Sustainable Development. 9
9. Peros, Joan, unpublished report, UNCED Rio+10 Summit Johannesburg, South Africa (2002). 7
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Public/private partnerships bring businesses desiring the protection offered by governments legalized force together with government agents that want the power that comes with economic control. The power of economics, and the force of government, must serve as a check and balance on each other; combining the two will ultimately result in tyranny. Free enterprise is lost amid subsidies, incentives, tax-breaks, and insider privilege, and with it goes the notion that the customer is the final determiner of how resources are allocated in production. The Sustainable Development partnerships involve some corporations domestic and multinational some tax-exempt family foundations, select individuals, and collectivist politicians and their administrations. Of these participants, only elected politicians are accountable to the public for their actions.
Economy:
The International Redistribution of Wealth and the Creation of Public/Private Partnerships

...current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. Maurice Strong, Secretary General, U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, 1992. (Also known as the Rio Earth Summit, where Agenda 21 was unveiled.)
According to its preamble, The developmental and environmental objectives of Agenda 21 will require a substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries. Language throughout Agenda 21 erroneously assumes that life is a zero-sum game (the wealth of the world was made at the expense of the poor, making them even poorer). This critique of economic ills denies the ingenuity of private action, individual determination, and truly freemarket innovation, and leads inevitably to the conclusion that if the conditions of the poor are to be improved, wealth must be taken from the rich. Sustainable Development embodies this unjust redistribution of wealth both in theory and in implementation, effectively lowering the standard of living in America to that of the rest of the world. The Draft Covenant on Environment and Development states in Article 8: equity will be achieved through implementation of the international economic order ... and through transfers of resources to developing countries.... When in fact such justification covers up the real transfer of power and resources which is to the elite cabal that drives world government. In addition to its appeal for the international redistribution of wealth, Sustainable Development is actually restructuring the economy, molding it not on private enterprise but on public/private partnerships.
8
Environment:
Nature Above Man
Americans support laws and regulations that are designated to effectively prevent pollution of the air, water, or the property of another. Yet, it is increasingly clear that Sustainable Development uses the environment simply as the means to promote a political agenda. For example, Al Gore says that Sustainable Development will bring about a wrenching transformation of American society. 10 Sustainable Development is ostensibly concerned with the environment; it is more concerned with restructuring the governmental system of the worlds nations so that all the people of the world will be the subjects of a global collective. Many of its proposed implementation strategies require the surrender of unalienable rights.
10. Minor shifts in policy, marginal adjustments in ongoing programs, moderate improvements in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the publics desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle, and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary. Gore, Al, Earth in the Balance. Plume (1993): 274. 9
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 This fact alone casts a serious shadow of doubt on the motives of Sustainable Development planners who would discard the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property in order to pursue dubious programs. 11 When Sustainable Development is implemented, ordinary people will be left unprotected from de facto decrees placing nature above man, while relegating man to the status of a biological resource. 12
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 partner organizations. The list goes on and on. While taxpayers foot the bill for the increasing costs of government education, parents are increasingly shut out of decisions crucial to the molding of their childs mind. Controversial programs designed for values clarification are being performed in government schools that employ powerful behavior control techniques and peer pressure to make [a] developing child question his or her individual worth and values, and are designed to disrupt parental oversight in the upbringing of their children, according to Professor of Organizational Behavior, Brent Duncan.
Educating the Youth to Mold the Minds of Tomorrow

All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind have been convinced that the fate of empires depends on the education of youth. Aristotle One means that Sustainable Developers use to ensure continuing support of their anti-human programs is through molding the minds of the next generation. Chapter 25 of the U.N. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 calls for the need to enlist and empower children and youth in reaching for sustainability. Even a cursory look at the federally-mandated curriculum being taught in classrooms in every government school in America would show that the doctrines of Sustainable Development are finding their way into every subject. French classes are used to teach students to save the earth; economics classes feature lectures discouraging individual initiative in the marketplace and decrying private ownership; history classes obscure the importance of Americas founding documents; mandatory service-learning programs enlist students to work for government-approved Sustainable Development
11. cf. Taylor, Jerry, Sustainable Development: A Dubious Solution in Search of a Problem, Cato Institute (2002). 12. Bureau of Land Management, Internal Working Document for ecosystem management, (March 1994). 10
Stakeholder Councils Restructuring American Government

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations." James Madison The way that Sustainable Development is carried out in local communities around the world is particularly alarming, especially to those who seek accountability in government. Operating within a system of stakeholder councils, organized to give any third parties a stake in the control over property in neighborhoods, proponents of Sustainable Development systematically promote their own ideas and marginalize any local opposition, particularly those individuals who advocate the freedom to use and enjoy private property. The product of a stakeholder council, often called a consensus statement or a vision statement, is typically approved by local governments without question, requiring citizens to submit to the questionable conclusions of a non-elected regional authority that is not accountable to the voters.
11
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Stakeholder council meetings are typically arranged under the auspices of soliciting input from community members on a project. This project may be initiated by local public officials, a local nonprofit organization, a national or regional non-profit organization, or an NGO. 13 It is very rare for community members to instigate the stakeholder visioning process. A typical stakeholder council meeting is run by a trained facilitator. 14 It is not the facilitators job to make sure that all views are entered into the record. His job, instead, is to guide the group to arrive at a consensus on the project. The consensus process has no mechanism for recording minority views. Since he is being paid by the organization responsible for the project, it is in his interest to arrive at a consensus sympathetic to the desired outcome of the project. Tactics vary between the facilitators, but consensus generally is reached by using subtle means to marginalize opposition, such as recording only the good ideas, and allowing criticism only for the bad ideas. A Sustainable Development stakeholder meeting in Greenville, South Carolina, was adjourned with a frank admission by the paid facilitator that they had not reached the consensus that he needed to support the predetermined plans. 15 Why all the effort to gain support for programs few citizens want? The answer to this question lies in the origin of each specific project. Sustainable Development projects are often initiated at the directive
13. Recall that many Non-Governmental Organizations are accredited by the U.N., making them international, or multinational in their political purpose. In this sense, they might be more appropriately called Global Governance Organizations. 14. Professional facilitators are frequently paid thousands of dollars for only a few hours of work. 15. Dill, Bob, Land Use Leaders Declare Defeat; Wrong Consensus Reached, Meetings Cancelled, Times-Examiner, Greenville, South Carolina. Steven Lipe, the meeting organizer, announced that the consensus is that we dont have enough people to make change. As far as I am concerned, our meeting is done. 12
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 of NGOs or non-profit organizations that have or create fear over problems that are portrayed as a crisis: development near a riparian corridor, poor water management infrastructure, or too many cars on the freeway are common examples. Once a problem has been identified, every NGO, non-profit, and local government body has a vast stock of Sustainable Development solutions at hand, provided by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). Indeed, ICLEI has a veritable treasure trove of boilerplate solutions for change agents, enabling them to identify problems with the goal of implementing predetermined outcomes that advance Sustainable Development policies. 16
ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability is directing policies that cause: - stack em and pack em housing - traffic congestion - inaccessible open space - managed control over our lives - mismanagement of water supplies - prohibition on natural resource management leading to increased fire hazards and private property restrictions Image 2: ICLEI, aka The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives
ICLEI, launched in 1990 at the World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, is based in Toronto, Canada, but has offices around the globe, including Oakland, California. Its stated mission is to provide policy recommendations to assist local governments in the implementation of Sustainable Development.
16. cf. Taylor, Jerry, op cit. 13
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 ICLEI was instrumental in the development of Agenda 21, having drafted Chapter 28 in 1991 in preparation for the upcoming summit. In a recent document, ICLEI confirmed its dedication to the U.N. mandate: Local Action 21 strategies [i.e. those formulated at the 2002 Earth Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa] will ensure the unwavering, systematic implementation of local action plans over the next decade. 17 Essentially, Sustainable Development claims knowledge of all sustainability issues and has stock solutions that can be applied in Stockholm, Boulder, Santa Cruz indeed, anywhere. Around the world, ICLEI is responsible for communicating with local special interests to translate international policy objectives into local and regional legislation. 18 Every county in America now has Sustainable Development directives guided by federal agencies, NGOs, and/or ICLEI.
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 After government and non-profit funding schemes, the third leg of the Sustainable Development financial insiders is a group of tax-exempt family foundations. These include the Rockefeller Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, the Turner Foundation, the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, the James Irvine Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation, the McArthur Foundation, and local community foundations.
Political Support
When George H. W. Bush signed the Rio Accords at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, he pledged the United States support for Agenda 21. A year later, when Bill Clinton created the Presidents Council for Sustainable Development by Executive Order, he laid the foundation for a proliferation of intermediate and local stakeholder councils that would set out to reinvent the structure of United States government. As Sustainable Development policies permeate every county in America, it has become apparent that the conflict is not a dynamic of Republican vs. Democrat, liberal vs. conservative, or left vs. right. In fact, the implementation of Sustainable Development is occurring on a bi-partisan basis.
Funding Sources
The list of money sources for the implementation of Sustainable Development is impressive. American taxes fund the federal agencies present focus: implementing Sustainable Development. Over two thousand NGOs are accredited by the United Nations for the purpose of implementing Sustainable Development in America, and are given massive tax advantages. Some of these NGOs are the Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club, the National Audubon Society, the American Planning Association, the National Teachers Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the U.S. Farm Bureau.
17. Otto-Zimmerman, Konrad, Local Action 21: Motto, Mandate, Movement, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, Toronto (2003): 2. See ICLEIs website for more information: http://www.iclei.org. 18. Note that ICLEIs objectives presuppose the notion that the goal of improving the conditions of the world can only be achieved through legislation, denigrating the intelligence and ingenuity of individuals in facing their particular circumstances, and placing them under the increasing oversight of government planners. 14
15
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Since all things ultimately come from natural resources on rural lands, the transfer of the landscape from citizen control to government control will make it easy for government and its partners NGOs, certain foundations and certain corporations to control what we have, what we do, and where we go. The transformation of free societies into collectivized societies through Sustainable Development ensures the dominance of a ruling elite which, by definition, excludes all but a very select few.
The Wildlands Network

The Wildlands Network (aka Wildlands Project) is the plan to eliminate human presence on at least 50 percent of the American landscape,19 and to heavily control human activity on most of the rest of American land. Examples of the piece-by-piece implementation of the Wildlands Network include road closings, the policy of breaching dams and the adoption of United Nations World Heritage Sites which are systematically being closed to use. Conservation biologists now agree that protecting isolated pockets of habitat isnt enough to protect our bears, jaguars, beavers, birds and other wildlife the only way to protect them is to practice conservation on a continental scale, announced Wildlands Project Executive Director, Leanne Klyza Linck, at the Society of Environmental Journalists Conference on September 12, 2003. The most significant tools of the Wildlands Network is the rapidly expanding imposition of habitat protection provisions under the
19. Reed Noss, who made this assertion in 1992, reiterated his commitment in a recent interview: Fifty percent is an estimate I made years ago of the proportion of an average region that would need to be managed for conservation in order to meet well-accepted conservation goals ... [It] turns out I was pretty much on the mark ... (Range Magazine, Fall 2003, p42) Noss has been the Science Editor for Wild Earth, the quarterly publication of the Wildlands Project. 17
Taken From: The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8a-e; United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment, Section 13.4.2.2.3; US Man and the Biosphere Strategic Plan, UN/US Heritage Corridor Program, The Wildlands Project, WildEarth, 1992. Also see Science, The High Cost of Biodiversity, 25 June, 1993, pp 1968-1871 and the Border 21 Sidebar of NAFTA. The very high percentage of buffer zone in the West is due to the very high percentage of federal land. NOTE: Do not use this map for real estate purposes. Copyright 1997, Environmental Perspectives, Inc. (207) 945-9878
Image 3: Prepared by Dr. Michael Coffman, Environmental Perspectives, Inc.
Sustainable Development Land Use Programs

Sustainable Development is a plan for global control including the restriction of land-use and resource extraction. The land use element of Sustainable Development calls for the implementation of two action plans designed to abolish private property: the Wildlands Network and Smart Growth. Upon final implementation of these plans all human action is subject to control.
16
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Endangered Species Act, the adoption of conservation easements and direct land acquisitions from battered willing sellers. The Wildlands Network seeks to collectivize all natural resources (e.g., water) and centralize all use decisions under government direction, often implemented through public/private partnerships.
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Plans to herd citizens into tax-subsidized, government controlled, mixed-use developments, 21 called human settlements. These settlements are sometimes distinguished from one another by how productive or useful the citizens are for society.22 Heavy restrictions on development in most areas, and the promotion of extremely dense development, constructed and managed by government partners, in other selected areas. Rations on public services, such as health care, drinking water 23 and energy resources (and sources). A typical day in the Orwellian society created by Smart Growth would consist of an individual waking up in his governmentprovided housing unit, eating a ration of government-subsidized foods purchased at a government-sanctioned grocery store, walking his children (if he has any) to the government-run child care center, boarding government-subsidized public transit to go to his government job, then returning to his quarters later that evening.
Smart Growth
The rural land-use plan embodied in the Wildlands Network is inextricably tied to its urban counterpart, Smart Growth. As human beings are barred from rural land, there will be a concentration of human activity in urban areas. Through Smart Growth, the infrastructure is being created for a post-private property era in which human action is subject to centralized government control. With the combined implementation of Smart Growth and the Wildlands Network, humans will be caged and the animals will run free. Sometimes called comprehensive planning or growth management, 20 Smart Growth is the centralized control of every aspect of urban life: energy and water use, housing stock and allocation, population levels and control, public health and dietary regimens, resources and recycling, "social justice" and education, toxic technology and waste management, transportation modes and mobility restrictions, business and economic activity including capping and trading energy. Smart Growth policies include: Transportation plans that reduce the freedom of mobility, forcing people to live near where they work, and transforming communities into heavily-regulated but self-sufficient feudalistic transit villages.
20. ...we call our [U.N. advocated planning] processes something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management, or smart growth. Lawrence, J. Gary, op cit. 18
21. The lure of paying as little as $150 per year in taxes on properties valued at $1.5 million has led to high occupancy in some developments in Portland, Oregon, for example. 22. The Smart Growth plan for Richland County, South Carolina, for example, distinguishes between employment-based villages, and non-employmentbased villages, with special gated communities set aside for the wealthy individuals responsible for the plan. Most of the non-employment-based villages are slated to be built in areas currently populated by the descendants of liberated slaves. 23. Reasonable access to water in urban areas is defined as the availability of 20 litres per capita per day at a distance no longer than 1,000 metres. Global Water Supply and Assessment Report 2000. 19
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 In order to meet the global equalization objectives of the economic E (see page 8), the Sustainable Development system requires global management of trade directed by the World Trade Organization (WTO) pursuant to policy created by the World Bank. This system of managed trade necessitates bringing down American production and middle class standards of living to a sustainable level. Similar to the European Union, the North American Union calls for an eventual merger of countries (Canada, Mexico, and the United States). By design, this leads to regional governance that sacrifices our unalienable rights and national sovereignty. 26
The North American Union and the Trans-Texas Corridor

The Trans-Texas Corridor is a major component in the creation of a North American Union (NAU). The Corridor facilitates the political-economic equalization of Mexico, Canada and the United States through the establishment of trade routes, toll roads, utility lines and inland ports. These systems are to be developed, managed and owned by various multi-national corporations working in public/ private partnership with government(s). 24, 25
Abusing Eminent Domain to Promote Public/Private Partnerships

The anti-private property Supreme Court decision, Kelo v. City of New London, 27 enables projects like the Trans-Texas Corridor to transfer private property and/or public infrastructure to private entities including foreign corporations. The Kelo decision neutralized the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment. 28 America is being transformed.
Image 4: The Trans-Texas Corridor as originally displayed on the North Americas SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO) website, http://www.nascocorridor.com/
24. Corsi, Jerome R., The Late Great USA - The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada (Chapter 6), World Ahead Media, Los Angeles, CA (2007). 25. Texans Uniting for Reform & Freedom: http://www.TexasTurf.org 20 26. Henry Lambs DVDs contain information on the North American Union and the Trans-Texas Corridor: https://secure.freedom.org/eco/nauboth.dyn 27. Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005); 125 S. Ct. 2655. 28. Institute for Justice: http://www.ij.org/ 21
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 If Americans, with your help, come to a timely understanding of the threat and face the challenge squarely, the deceptive fraud of Sustainable Development will quickly come to light. Together, we will rise to restore Liberty through a renewal of reason and respect for the dignity of individual determination. The future of the freedom once taken for granted in America depends on us recognizing and countering the threats of Sustainable Development.
What You Can Do

Once again a majority of this court has proved that if enough people get together and act in concert, they can take something and not pay for it. ... But theft is still theft. Theft is theft even when the government approves of the thievery... Turning a democracy into a kleptocracy does not enhance the stature of the thieves; it only diminishes the legitimacy of the government. Justice Janice Brown, dissenting opinion, San Remo Hotel v. City and County of San Francisco 29 Sustainable Development is restructuring our lives and is targeting our children through an educational regime that seeks to develop collectivist attitudes, values and beliefs. Sustainable Development documents call for the abolishment of private property30 and the freedom that private property supports. It supplants long-standing State laws and causes irreparable harm to our economy and our society. If individual members of our society do nothing, the continuing loss of liberty will result in increasing social confusion and discord, rising resource shortages, financial decay and a dimming future for us and our posterity. The looming battle of ideas should be recognized as a classic and perhaps ultimate battle between Liberty and Tyranny. The social, economic, and political transformations Sustainable Development requires will mean the suppression of unalienable rights for all people. 31
29. No. S091757., SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 27 Cal. 4th 643; 41 P.3d 87, March 8, 2002 30. Heywood, V.H. (ed.). op cit. 31. For a more comprehensive discussion of this topic, see the Freedom 21 Alternative to the U.N.s Agenda 21 Program for Sustainable Development. http://www.freedom21.org/alternative/preface.shtml 22
6 Practical Steps to Restore and Protect Liberty

1. Recognize and resist the trend to replace political boundaries with regional governance. Recognize that this form of government leads to a breakdown of accountability to the citizenry. 2. Refuse local government receipt of federal or state money for new Sustainable Development programs because they breach the American system of federalism and raid the treasury. Withdraw from established Sustainable Development programs. 3. Avoid local government partnerships with the federal government, NGOs, foundations and corporations that advance the anti-liberty Sustainable Development agenda. Do not surrender your town or county to the insider privilege of Sustainable Developers and their monied interests. 4. Understand and enforce the role of public officials in your community to administer government in a manner that protects individual liberty and ensures equal justice. 5. Know and understand the Constitution, to which elected officials swore an oath with particular attention to Article 1, Section 8, the 9th and 10th Amendments, which address the limitations on federal power, and the 14th Amendment, which limits the states police power. 6. Kick ICLEI out of your town. Reference ICLEI Primer at: www.FreedomAdvocates.org
23
Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Video:
Freedom Advocates Neighborhood Tools

Pamphlets:

You may have heard people talking about Sustainable Development in public meetings, on television and on the radio. Consultants talk about it, university professors lecture on it, and government entities are increasingly implementing it. But what is Sustainable Development? That is precisely the question this pamphlet is intended to address. Bulk Pricing: 1 - 10 copies 100 - 1000 copies 1000 + copies $4.00 each $3.00 each Call: 831.684.2232
The Most Comprehensive Expos of Sustainable Development to Date!

Liberty! A Life of Ones Own Michael Shaw, Freedom 21 Santa Cruz, CA, now Freedom Advocates Transformational Education: Preparing our Children for Global Citizenship Michael Chapman, Ed Watch, MN The Smart Growth Fraud Michael Coffman, Sovereignty International, ME Exposing Group Manipulation Tactics Beverly Eakman, National Education Consortium, MD Sustainable Development: The Wrenching Transformation of America Tom DeWeese, American Policy Center, VA
Featuring Five of the Nations Leading Experts:
For the People and their Publ ic Of f icia ls

Prepa red by
Fr e e dom A dvoc at e s
Recognize Unalienable R ights
w w w.f reedomadvocates.org
Sustainable Development: Global to Local Action Plans

This thorough expos is the third in a series of Freedom Advocates pamphlets. It provides an analysis of how sustainable policy invades and directs your county through its global to local action plan. The booklet is designed to provide information that you and your community need in order to preserve liberty at the local level. Understand and join in the battle to prevent globalist policies from swallowing up our unalienable rights. Bulk Pricing: 1 - 100 copies 101 - 1000 copies 1001 + copies $5.00 each $3.00 each Call: 831.684.2232
A Six Hour Presentation on DVD

Produced by the American Policy Center in association with Freedom 21 Santa Cruz
Only $49! $29 Special Price with this order form!

(Includes shipping)
For more Freedom Advocates products, call: 831.684.2232, or visit our Store at: http://www.FreedomAdvocates.org
(Add $2.00 shipping for 1-10 copies of either pamphlet, call for shipping costs for orders over 10)
Audio:
8 Hours of Radio Interviews and Presentations from the Freedom 21 Santa Cruz Radio Show
America is being transformed from the land of the free to the land of the controlled via mechanisms that target the middle class. Knowing reality the threat and the potential is the foundation for restoring and preserving liberty. Hosted by Michael Shaw, Freedom Advocates, with the following guests and topics:
Abolishing Private Property - Dr. Michael Coffman (2 hours) Screening your Child for Mental Health Dismantling the Family - Dr. Karen Effrem Central Banking and Sustainable Tyranny - Dr. Edwin Viera Fabian Socialism, Regionalizing England, and the European Union - Robert Theobald The All Out War on Natural Law - William Roberts (2 hours)
Please send me: _ _ _ Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 _ _ _ Sustainable Development:
Yes! I need to know more!
Enclosed is my check or money order for $_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Global to Local Action Plans
Freedom Advocates
P.O. Box 3330 Freedom, CA 95019 831.684.2232 831.685.1472 (Fax)
Please make checks payable to:
SM
_ _ _ War on Reason Audio CD sets _ _ _ Americas Choice DVDs _ _ _ Total Items $_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Total Price with Shipping Name: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ City: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ State: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Zip: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Email: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
www.FreedomAdvocates.org
Price: $25.00 (Plus $4.00 shipping)
24
NAFTA Superhighway
(a)House Concurrent Resolution 40; 110th Congress 1st Session; NAFTA Superhighway (4 Pages) (b)House Concurrent Resolution 487; 109th Congress 2D Session; NAFTA Superhighway (3 Pages) (c)SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 387; 2007 session; Virginia Government; NAFTA Superhighway (2 Pages (d)The NAFTA Superhighway; Congressman Ron Paul's Official Government website (paul.house.gov ) (1 Page) (e)Congressman Paul Opposes NAFTA Superhighway; Congressman Ron Paul's Official Government website (paul.house.gov ) (1 Page) Total 11 Pages of Documentation and print-outs from at least 0 news website. All documentation from the U.S. And State Government sources.
IV
110TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION
H. CON. RES. 40
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 22, 2007 Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. WAMP, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, Mr. PAUL, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. DUNCAN, and Ms. FOXX) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. Whereas the United States Departments of State, Commerce, and Homeland Security participated in the formation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) on March 23, 2005, representing a tri-lateral agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico designed, among
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
VerDate Aug 31 2005
03:23 Jan 23, 2007
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC40.IH
HC40
2 other things, to facilitate common regulatory schemes between these countries; Whereas reports issued by the SPP indicate that it has implemented regulatory changes among the three countries that circumvent United States trade, transportation, homeland security, and border security functions and that the SPP will continue to do so in the future; Whereas the actions taken by the SPP to coordinate border security by eliminating obstacles to migration between Mexico and the United States actually makes the United States-Mexico border less secure because Mexico is the primary source country of illegal immigrants into the United States; Whereas according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly increased since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA and the SPP; Whereas the regulatory and border security changes implemented and proposed by the SPP violate and threaten United States sovereignty; Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union to facilitate trade between the SPP countries;
Whereas the State of Texas has already begun planning of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a major multi-modal transportation project beginning at the United States-Mexico borHCON 40 IH
VerDate Aug 31 2005 03:23 Jan 23, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HC40.IH HC40
3 der, which would serve as an initial section of a NAFTA Superhighway System; Whereas it could be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would likely increase the insurance rates for American drivers; Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would likely include funds from foreign consortiums and be controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States: Now, therefore, be it 1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
2 concurring), That 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(1) the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System; (2) the United States should not allow the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) to implement further regulations that would create a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and (3) the President of the United States should indicate strong opposition to these acts or any other
11
HCON 40 IH
4 1 2 proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
HCON 40 IH
IV
109TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION
H. CON. RES. 487
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. PAUL, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, and Mr. TANCREDO) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);
ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
VerDate Aug 31 2005
06:24 Sep 29, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC487.IH
HC487
2 Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA; Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union; Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers; Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States: Now, therefore, be it 1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
2 concurring), That 3 4 5 6
(1) the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System; (2) the United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and
HCON 487 IH
7 8
VerDate Aug 31 2005
06:24 Sep 29, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\HC487.IH
HC487
3 1 2 3 (3) the President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
HCON 487 IH
VerDate Aug 31 2005 06:24 Sep 29, 2006 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 E:\BILLS\HC487.IH HC487
2007 SESSION
INTRODUCED 079105808 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 387 Offered January 10, 2007 Prefiled January 10, 2007 Memorializing the Congress of the United States to take such constitutional action as may be necessary to prevent the executive branch of the federal government from unilateral action in implementing the NAFTA Superhighway System and the creation of a North American Union. PatronsReynolds; Delegate: Marshall, R.G. Referred to Committee on Rules WHEREAS, the safety of Virginia's highways is a prime responsibility of the Virginia General Assembly that cannot be delegated to any other entity; and WHEREAS, a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada is now being implemented by the current presidential administration; and WHEREAS, the system includes multiple connections with Virginia's already heavily traveled roads and is being implemented without any action by the United States Congress; and WHEREAS, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters has warned, in its August 2006 national magazine, that the NAFTA Superhighway will result in United States trucks being replaced by Mexican vehicles, more unsafe rigs being operated on American roads, and more drivers relying on drugs to complete long hauls; and the maintenance of Mexican truck brakes and tires falls far below United States standards; and WHEREAS, Mexican drivers are compelled by companies that employ them to drive alone an excessive 25 days a month and a distance of 4,500 kilometers over the course of five or six nights without sleep, requiring them to resort to cocaine and crystal methamphetamine to stay awake; and WHEREAS, the national Teamster magazine, in interviewing a sample of Mexican drivers, found no one who had not been involved in a highway fatality on the job; and WHEREAS, the NAFTA Superhighway System will therefore bring onto United States soil a new army of drivers who are likely to cause accidents on America's roads; and WHEREAS, given the generally acknowledged corruption of many businesses in Mexico, it will be difficult, if not impossible, for Virginians, as well as other Americans, to collect insurance claims against Mexican companies that employ Mexican truck drivers who may cause accidents in the United States, causing insurance rates for Virginians to increase sharply; and WHEREAS, an initial portion of the NAFTA Superhighway System, already under way in Texas, involves a pattern contract with the state by the Spanish-United States Cintra-Zachry consortium that, in return for a single lump-sum payment to the state by Cintra, grants the right to levy unregulated tolls for years to come, greatly increasing the cost of driving for all motorists; and WHEREAS, neither taxpayers nor United States banks are willing to provide the billions of dollars required to construct the enormous NAFTA Superhighway System, and the needed funds are expected to be supplied instead by foreign consortiums, resulting in America's arterial highway system being under foreign management and financial control; and WHEREAS, in the United States House of Representatives, House Concurrent Resolution 487 has been introduced, opposing not only the NAFTA Superhighway System, but also the creation of a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and WHEREAS, a North American Union, similar to the European Union, would essentially eliminate the southern and northern borders of the United States and is presently being implemented by the current presidential administration without the approval of the United States Congress; and WHEREAS, a North American Union would threaten the sovereignty of the United States, the precepts of the United States Constitution, and the laws and Constitution of Virginia, all without the consent of the citizens of the Commonwealth; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED by the Senate, the House of Delegates concurring, That the Virginia General Assembly hereby declare its formal opposition to allowing components of the Interstate Highway System in Virginia to become part of the NAFTA Superhighway System, as well as its opposition to the creation of a North American Union; and, be it RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Congress of the United States be urged to prevent the implementation of the NAFTA Superhighway System and the creation of a North American Union; and, be it RESOLVED FURTHER, That the Congress of the United States be memorialized to take such constitutional action as may be necessary to prevent the executive branch of the federal government
INTRODUCED
SJ387
3/24/10 4:23
SJ387
59 60 61 62 63 64
2 of 2
from unilaterally implementing the NAFTA Superhighway System and the creation of a North American Union; and, be it RESOLVED FINALLY, That the Clerk of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Virginia Congressional Delegation so that they may be apprised of the sense of the General Assembly of Virginia in this matter.
The NAFTA Superhighway
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?view=article&catid=49:2006-texas-straig...
The NAFTA Superhighway

October 30, 2006 By now many Texans have heard about the proposed NAFTA Superhighway, which is also referred to as the trans-Texas corridor. What you may not know is the extent to which plans for such a superhighway are moving forward without congressional oversight or media attention. This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside. This will require coordinated federal and state eminent domain actions on an unprecedented scale, as literally millions of people and businesses could be displaced. The loss of whole communities is almost certain, as planners cannot wind the highway around every quaint town, historic building, or senior citizen apartment for thousands of miles. Governor Perry is a supporter of the superhighway project, and Congress has provided small amounts of money to study the proposal. Since this money was just one item in an enormous transportation appropriations bill, however, most members of Congress were not aware of it. The proposed highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP. The SPP was first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco. The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But dont be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests. The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution-- which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade. The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union--complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether. A new resolution, introduced by Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway, or enter into any agreement that advances the concept of a North American Union. I wholeheartedly support this legislation, and predict that the superhighway will become a sleeper issue in the 2008 election. Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live. The SPP agreement, including the plan for a major transnational superhighway through Texas, is moving forward without congressional oversight-- and that is an outrage. The administration needs a strong message from Congress that the American people will not tolerate backroom deals that threaten our sovereignty. ShareThis
1 of 1
3/12/2012 10:04 AM
Paul Opposes NAFTA Superhighway
http://paul.house.gov/index.php?view=article&catid=36:2006-press-relea...
Paul Opposes NAFTA Superhighway

Congressman Paul Opposes NAFTA Superhighway October 4, 2006 Washington: Congressman Ron Paul joined several of his congressional colleagues in expressing outrage at the planned NAFTA superhighway that will require eminent domain actions on an enormous scale in Texas and beyond. H.Con.Res 487, introduced by Virginia Representative Virgil Goode and cosponsored by Paul, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway or enter into any plans to create a North American Union between Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. Plans for such a superhighway are part of the so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), which is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, the SPP is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March 2005. According to the SPP website, this dialogue will create new supra-national organizations to coordinate border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the three governments. As such, it is but an extension of the NAFTA and CAFTA agreements-- government trade schemes that bypass the express constitutional authority of Congress to regulate trade. This is a matter of national sovereignty, Paul stated. Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live. The SPP agreement, which includes plans for a major transnational superhighway through Texas, is moving forward without congressional oversight-- and that is an outrage. The administration needs a strong message from Congress that the American people will not tolerate backroom deals that threaten our sovereignty. ShareThis
1 of 1
3/12/2012 10:04 AM
Trans-Texas Corridor
(a)Local toll authority wins bid against Spanish firm in North Texas Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (b)Much ado about nothing: Texas transportation overhaul bill dies Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (c)Spanish firm using loan from U.S. to build segments of Texas toll road Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (d)Regional council prefers Texas public agency to build toll road Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (e)Texas transportation overhaul bill still in the works Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (f)Public hearing, protest rally center on Trans-Texas Corridor Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (g)TxDOT says Trans-Texas Corridor is dead Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (h)Trans-Texas Corridor draws public comments, outcry Landline Magazine (2 Pages) (i)Spanish company lands four infrastructure projects Landline Magazine (2 Pages) Total 18 Pages of Documentation and print-outs from at least 1 news website. All documentation from Landline Magazine
Local toll authority wins bid against Spanish firm in North Texas
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:K_J4NpiSlucJ:www.landlinemag.com/...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2007/Jun07/062507/062907-02.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 26, 2012 07:42:22 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
June 29, 2007
Toll revenue from a proposed road project will
stay in Texas, state officials said Thursday. The North Texas Tollway Authority bid $3.3 billion to edge out Spanish toll operator Cintra for the rights to build a 26-mile portion of the Texas State Highway 121 toll road in Denton and Collin counties in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The Texas Transportation Commission voted 4-1 Thursday, June 28, to accept a recommendation by the Dallas-area Regional Transportation Council that the project remain in local hands. Commissioners had released a statement in February saying they favored Cintra the Spanish toll operator that has a 50-percent stake in the Indiana Toll Road lease which made a cash offer of $2.8 billion at the time for the Texas project. But the North Texas Tollway Authority stepped up late in the process and offered to pay the Texas Department of Transportation $2.5 billion upfront and another $833 million in future payments for a total of $3.3 billion to finance, design, construct, operate and maintain the road. The toll authoritys bid ensures that toll revenues remain in North Texas. Transportation commissioners stated in a press release they believe the toll authoritys proposal meets the states goals to reduce congestion, enhance safety, expand economic opportunity, improve air quality and increase the value of transportation assets. The authority has a 50-year history of constructing and operating toll roads in the Dallas region. The authority must meet several DOT benchmarks to proceed with the project. The two parties must also agree on a length of contract. As it stands, the tollway authority plans to open the first segment in the summer of 2008 and complete three remaining segments from 2010 through
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:09 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:K_J4NpiSlucJ:www.landlinemag.com/...
2012. Cintra remains a powerhouse in the Lone Star State. In December 2004, the Spanish company partnered with Austin-based Zachry Construction Corp. to commit to $6 billion in private dollars to build the proposed TTC-35 phase of the Trans-Texas Corridor between Dallas and San Antonio. The first portion of the TTC-35 is a proposed $1.3 billion toll road from Austin to Seguin, TX. By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
Copyright 2012 OOIDA All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy 1 NW OOIDA Drive | Grain Valley, Missouri 64029 1-800-444-5791 | (816) 229-5791
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:09 PM
Much ado about nothing: Texas transportation overhaul bill dies
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:a3YArnEw394J...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2009/June09/060109/060209-03.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 27, 2012 23:16:29 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
June 2, 2009

Despite weeks of rhetoric from lawmakers about the importance of reaching agreement on a major transportation bill, the Texas Legislature wrapped up their regular session Monday, June 2, without a deal on the bill that once included a provision to overhaul the Texas Department of Transportation. The biggest stumbling block for House Bill 300 turned out to be a provision that called for allowing local option fuel taxes to pay for transportation projects. Sen. John Carona, D-Dallas, said the language was essential to ease traffic congestion in urban areas. A House-Senate conference committee recently met to work out differences in the bill. The lawmakers opted to remove the effort to permit counties to hold referendums allowing voters to determine whether or not the tax on gas and diesel should increase by as much as 10 cents per gallon. The aftereffects of the bills demise are far reaching on transportation. Despite calls from the House to give the Texas Transportation Commission an extreme makeover, the status quo won out. House lawmakers sought to replace the governor-appointed five-member board in retaliation for turning a deaf ear to public sentiment about tolls in recent years. In its place, the House wanted to elect 15 board members. Even with consensus from both chambers to remove the Trans-Texas Corridor from state law, the controversial pet project of Gov. Rick Perry lives on. At one time the corridor plan called for private contractors to build and operate billions of dollars of toll roads in the state. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has criticized the corridor plan since it was unveiled in 2002. The Association cited reasons that included the proposed toll rate of 50 cents per mile for large trucks. OOIDA also opposes the private ownership of roadways by foreign companies. Texas officials had tapped the Spanish company Cintra to design and build the first leg of the corridor. Several provisions to curtail private toll roads also wont take effect. Controls included prohibiting non-compete clauses, limits on how long tolls can be charged, and a requirement that TXDOT submit non-toll options to the Legislature for evaluation. In addition, portions of public highways could be converted into toll roads only as long as the public highway consists of at least the same number of lanes that will not have tolls. Also falling by the wayside was a plan to shift from TxDOT to a new Texas Department of Motor Vehicles
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:00 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:a3YArnEw394J...
duties that include motor vehicle titling, vehicle registration and oversight of trucking. Abolishment of the Transportation Commission would have been a blow to Gov. Perry. House lawmakers voted to pursue changes following a state report that called for more accountability and responsiveness to lawmakers and the public. All five current commissioners were appointed by Perry. The five highway chiefs have the final say on which roads to build, which companies to hire, and which policies to set for the agency. Most Texans credit those commissioners with starting the state down the path toward toll roads. By 2007, state lawmakers tried to apply the brakes to those plans with a two-year moratorium. Those critical of the DOT point out that the agency was able to fend off the legislative efforts because of loopholes. It could be a while before lawmakers get another crack at implementing changes at TxDOT. Short of a special session to address these issues, lawmakers arent scheduled to return to Austin until the next regular session convenes in 2011. To view other legislative activities of interest for Texas in 2009, click here. By Keith Goble, state legislative editor Editors Note: Please share your thoughts with us about the legislation included in this story. Comments may be sent to statelegislativedesk@ooida.com.
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:00 PM
Spanish firm using loan from U.S. to build segments of Texas toll road
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:x4i5L9HVtp4J:www.landlinemag.com/...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2008/Mar08/031008/031308-04.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 12, 2012 13:23:52 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
March 13, 2008
Officials with the Spanish toll road operator Cintra
have announced that the company has secured $430 million in loans from the U.S. government to build and operate two segments of a toll road in central Texas. Cintra officials announced the companys financial plan for the $1.36 billion Highway 130 segments on Monday, March 10. OOIDA Senior Government Affairs Representative Mike Joyce told Land Line that the Association does raise red flags when federal dollars are used to subsidize private investors. Officials with the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association are not, however, categorically opposed to a state using future toll revenue to pay off bonds. Im skeptical of any funding schemes that involve the private sector, Joyce said. Truck tolls on Segment 5 and Segment 6 of Highway 130 are contracted to be 50 cents per mile when the road opens. The 50-year contract includes a formula for increases. Tolls for cars will start at 12.5 cents per mile. Cintra and its partner in the project, Texas-based Zachry American Infrastructure, signed a contract a year ago to design and build a 40-mile portion of Texas Highway 130, a tolled bypass of Austin running parallel to Interstate 35 in the Austin-San Antonio corridor. The first four segments of the Highway 130 project, totaling about 50 miles, are part of the Central Texas Turnpike System constructed from 2002 through early 2008 with bonds issued through the Texas Transportation Commission. Tolls on those sections are being used to pay the bonds on the first four segments. The Cintry-Zachry consortium, formed in 2005, expects to begin construction next year on Segment 5 and Segment 6 of Highway 130 on rights of way leased from the Texas Department of Transportation. The 40-mile section is scheduled to open in 2012.
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:x4i5L9HVtp4J:www.landlinemag.com/...
A similar Cintra-Zachry partnership is designing the first leg of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a proposed 4,000-mile network of toll roads and railway lines to increase the flow of freight and people from South Texas to the U.S. heartland. Cintra also has a 55-percent share of the lease for the Indiana Toll Road and a 50-percent share of the Chicago Skyway lease. The company partnered with companies affiliated with Macquarie Bank of Australia for those deals. For the Highway 130 segments being built by Cintra-Zachry, TxDOT has agreed to provide and pay for back office functions including toll collectors, other staff, call center, equipment, transponders and maintenance for the roadway. Cintras financing will come from a 35-year, $430 million loan from the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 a U.S. Department of Transportation program for jump-starting construction along with a $686 million private bank loan and $197 million in shareholder equity. Cintra will also draw on other equity accounts, officials stated in a press release. The TIFI Act program is designed to match a certain percentage of the cost for a road built using private sector money. U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters stated in a press release that the TIFI Act loan will give Highway 130 the push it needs. OOIDAs Joyce points to the comparison between Cintras 35-year loan from the federal TIFI Act program and the 50-year concession agreement for Segments 5 and 6. We know that theyre looking to turn a profit, he said. Click here to read some quick facts and figures posted by Cintra about Highway 130. Click here to read contractual documents on the project posted by the Texas Department of Transportation. By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
Regional council prefers Texas public agency to build toll road
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l07NpYNmaRwJ:www.landlinemag.co...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2007/Jun07/061807/061907-03.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Dec 16, 2011 03:43:02 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
June 19, 2007
Opponents of privatization have won a

noteworthy victory in Texas. The Regional Transportation Council in the Dallas area voted 27-10 in favor of awarding a highway project to a public agency the North Texas Tollway Authority instead of a private, foreign company. The project involves the construction of a section of the Texas Route 121 toll road. The councils vote came on Monday, June 18, and if upheld by the state Transportation Commission, it will shut out the private company Cintra Concessiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte S.A. of Spain. The Texas 121 toll road is part of a system being designed and built to handle growing traffic congestion in Denton and Collin counties. The Texas Transportation Commission could vote as soon as June 28 on whether to uphold the regional councils recommendation to stick with public operation instead of allowing the road to go to a private business. The transportation commission is not bound to uphold the regional councils recommendation. Gov. Rick Perrys administration and transportation commissioner Ric Williamson have already tendered contracts to private-sector investors for toll projects. The commission has contracted with Cintra for $1.3 billion worth of work on Perrys proposed Trans-Texas Corridor. The public North Texas Tollway Authority, created in 1997, uses bond revenues to finance, build and operate turnpikes in North Texas, according to its Web site, ntta.org. Cintra is best known for building or investing in toll roads around the globe. The Spanish company makes up half of the foreign consortium that leased the Indiana Toll Road in 2006.
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:09 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l07NpYNmaRwJ:www.landlinemag.co...
By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:09 PM
Texas transportation overhaul bill still in the works
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:K8sArsDZy5IJ:www.landlinemag.com/...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2009/May09/051809/052209-03.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 26, 2012 22:18:47 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
May 22, 2009
Time will tell how much of a price, if any, the

Texas Transportation Commission may pay for turning a deaf ear to public sentiment. With about one week remaining for the Texas Legislature to finish haggling over provisions in a bill to overhaul the Texas Department of Transportation, negotiators from both chambers will determine what makes the final cut. The Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee unanimously endorsed the bill this week after making nearly three dozen revisions to the House-approved version. The bills next stop is the Senate floor where a vote is expected during the Memorial Day weekend. HB300 will then head to a conference committee to work out the final details. Issues of contention include what to do with the Transportation Commission. The House is calling for replacing the governor-appointed five-member board. In its place, they want to elect 15 board members. Senate lawmakers are seeking milder changes. They want to keep the current five-member setup but trim their terms from six years to two. Also, the governor no longer would be able to keep a commission member in place beyond the end of his or her term. Another sticking point is a provision addressing red-light cameras. House lawmakers approved phasing out use of the technology after current contracts expire. The Senate wants to continue using the enforcement tool but allow offenders to take a driver safety course to avoid $75 fines. Both chambers are on board with the removal of the Trans-Texas Corridor from state law. The controversial pet project of Gov. Rick Perry called for private contractors to build and operate billions of dollars of toll roads in the state. However, the state still could pursue tolling plans. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has criticized the corridor plan since it was unveiled in 2002. The Association cited reasons that included the proposed toll rate of 50 cents per mile for large trucks.
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:04 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:K8sArsDZy5IJ:www.landlinemag.com/...
OOIDA also opposes the private ownership of roadways by foreign companies. Texas officials had tapped the Spanish company Cintra to design and build the first leg of the corridor. If lawmakers agree to the provision abolishing the Transportation Commission, it would be a blow to Gov. Perry. House lawmakers voted to take the action following a state report that called for more accountability and responsiveness to lawmakers and the public. All five current commissioners were appointed by Perry. The five highway chiefs have the final say on which roads to build, which companies to hire, and which policies to set for the agency. Most Texans credit those commissioners with starting the state down the path toward toll roads. By 2007, state lawmakers tried to apply the brakes to those plans with a two-year moratorium. Those critical of the DOT point out that the agency was able to fend off the legislative efforts because of loopholes. Lawmakers willingness to put a tombstone on the Trans-Texas Corridor is welcome news for most Texans. The planned project called for private contractors to build and operate billions of dollars of toll roads in the state. The legislative action to give the plan the boot was well received by OOIDA. This is a step in the right direction, said OOIDA Executive Vice President Todd Spencer. Texas truckers played a major role in reaching this point as well as a majority of citizens in Texas. Both the House and Senate also would shift from TxDOT to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles duties that include motor vehicle titling, vehicle registration and oversight of trucking. To view other legislative activities of interest for Texas in 2009, click here. By Keith Goble, state legislative editor Editors Note: Please share your thoughts with us about the legislation included in this story. Comments may be sent to statelegislativedesk@ooida.com.
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:04 PM
Public hearing, protest rally center on Trans-Texas Corridor
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fEyTpvRusSMJ:www.landlinemag.com...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2007/Feb07/022607/022807-01.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 12, 2012 15:34:52 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
February 28, 2007
Texans are getting a chance to speak their

minds on proposals such as the Trans-Texas Corridor and other toll roads at a public hearing Thursday, March 1. And on the following day - Texas Independence Day - opponents of the corridor have scheduled a rally to protest the proposed 4,000-mile network of toll roads, railway lines and utilities. Both events are scheduled at the state Capitol in Austin. The Texas State Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security has scheduled a public hearing from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Thursday in the Extension Auditorium in the state Capitol. The three topics listed on the agenda are the Trans-Texas Corridor, public-private partnerships and toll roads. "Except for a few expert witnesses, the hearing is dedicated to listening to public concerns," committee chairman Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, stated in a press release. Carona, like other fellow Texans who want to pull back on the reins on such projects, has said there has not been enough public input into the proposed 4,000-mile Trans-Texas Corridor network of toll roads, railway lines and utilities. Forms to sign up to testify at the hearing are available at the committee office, (512) 463-0067, by fax at (512) 463-2840, or by e-mail at john.webb_sc@senate.state.tx.us. The day after the hearing, several grassroots groups have plans to participate in a protest rally against the Trans-Texas Corridor. The Farm & Ranch Freedom Alliance, Corridor Watch and Citizens for a Better Waller County are involved in the rally, dubbed "Don't Tag Texas."
1 of 2
3/7/2012 3:59 AM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fEyTpvRusSMJ:www.landlinemag.com...
They intend to parade up Congress Avenue on Friday, March 2, toward the state Capitol. Some people will have their livestock and farm equipment in tow to protest not only the Trans-Texas Corridor, but a government proposal to tag all livestock through the National Animal Identification System, according to promotions on the groups' Web sites. With March 2 being Texas Independence Day, the grassroots groups vow to celebrate their independence by protesting the proposed toll network and government control of their farms and farmland. "The TTC stands to be the largest land-grab and eminent domain project in the history of this country," 2006 Democratic candidate for Texas Agricultural Commissioner said in a press release for the Farm & Ranch Freedom Alliance. - By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/7/2012 3:59 AM
TxDOT says Trans-Texas Corridor is dead
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wLfMbYyC4jgJ:www.landlinemag.com...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2009/Jan09/010509/010609-02.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 17, 2012 10:05:19 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
January 6, 2009
Texas transportation officials say the massive

toll-road proposal known as the Trans-Texas Corridor is dead. But Texas Department of Transportation Executive Director Amadeo Saenz said TxDOT will continue to pursue new infrastructure including toll roads under a revised plan unveiled Tuesday, Jan. 6, during the annual Texas Transportation Forum. The Trans-Texas Corridor, as a single project concept, is not the choice of Texans. So weve decided to put the name to rest, Saenz stated in prepared remarks during the forum. That does not mean that we will abdicate our mission. We will still develop transportation projects that move Texas forward. Saenz said TxDOT will continue to use the financial tools authorized by law. Those include public-private partnerships and toll roads. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has criticized the corridor plan since Gov. Rick Perry proposed it in 2002 because of, among other reasons, the proposed toll rate of 50 cents per mile for heavy trucks. OOIDA has also opposed the private ownership of roadways by foreign companies. Texas officials had tapped Spanish company Cintra to design and build the first leg of the proposed Trans-Texas Corridor. Saenz said the new plan, which he referred to as Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009, will consist of individual projects instead of one large project or corridor. But it looks like only the names have changed. Projects that had been developed under the heading of the Trans-Texas Corridor will now become a series of individual projects, Saenz stated.
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wLfMbYyC4jgJ:www.landlinemag.com...
For example, Loop 9 in Dallas will be known and developed as Loop 9, not the donut of TTC-35. Interstate 69 will be known and developed as Interstate 69, not Trans-Texas Corridor 69. Opponents of the Trans-Texas Corridor say its the same book but with a different cover. Not one law has been changed, and not one Texas Transportation Commission minute order has been rescinded, Terri Hall, director of TURF, the Texans United for Reform and Freedom, told Land Line. Hall said talk of the Trans-Texas Corridor being dead has been circulating for months in political circles. There has been nothing done other than the transportation director making this announcement using political doublespeak, she said. Lawmakers will convene next week in Austin for the 2009 legislative session. Hall points out that theres been a change in leadership in the state House since the previous session. Texas lawmakers meet in session every other year. By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
Trans-Texas Corridor draws public comments, outcry
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DgyQQ7hNWskJ:www.landlinemag.co...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2007/Feb07/022607/030207-01.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 29, 2012 08:57:11 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
March 2, 2007
A state Senate committee in Texas has extended the

deadline to submit public comments relating to toll roads, privatization and the Trans-Texas Corridor. The state Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security extended the deadline by a week following a public hearing Thursday, March 1, in Austin. A staff member said the committee had received more than 1,000 written comments so far. Dozens of the people who signed up to speak at the hearing were critical of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a proposed 4,000-mile network of toll roads, rail lines and utilities. Among other things, they said they don't want to see the project break up their land or be operated for profit by foreign investors. Cathie Adams was one of about 125 people who signed up to speak at the public hearing. She not only testified at the public hearing Thursday, but also took part in a protest rally Friday in Austin on behalf of the Texas Eagle Forum, of which she is president. "Our gasoline taxes have been pilfered," Adams told Land Line during a phone interview Friday. "If those funds would not have been pilfered, we would have had more money in them." Adams, whose organization fights for family values, said she understands that excessive tolling in Texas would hurt truckers and the economy. "You all as truck drivers have got to pass that on, so we're paying," Adams said. "We're paying tolls, we're (spending) gas taxes on things like stateemployee pay raises. I mean, come on - quit it." To submit a written comment about the Trans-Texas Corridor, toll roads or privatization, click here and then scroll down to the "Public Hearing Witness Registration Form."
1 of 2
3/7/2012 4:02 AM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:DgyQQ7hNWskJ:www.landlinemag.co...
Send comments by mail to: Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee PO Box 12068 Austin, TX 78711 Fax comments to (512) 463-2840. Questions about filing comments should be e-mailed to: john.webb_sc@senate.state.tx.us or called in to (512) 463-0067. Archived video from Thursday's public hearing is available on the committee's Web site at http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/commit /c640/c640.htm. The hearing lasted from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., which included about six hours of comments from the general public intermingled with statements from transportation and elected officials. By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/7/2012 4:02 AM
Spanish company lands four infrastructure projects
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PCyozyAoDwsJ:www.landlinemag.com...
This is Google's cache of http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2009/Jan09/011209/011209-04.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jan 26, 2012 01:16:11 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only version
January 12, 2009
Although new to the scene, a Spanish company

is turning out to be a major player in the North American infrastructure market. Grupo ACS, a U.S. subsidiary of two Spanish companies, Iridium and Dragados, has been selected to pursue four long-term infrastructure projects since June 2008 in Texas, Florida, North Carolina and Quebec, Canada. The most recent agreement for Grupo ACS is the right to engineer the seven-mile, $700 million Mid-Currituck Bridge in North Carolina. The engineering deal could lead to ACS acquiring a public-private partnership to build and maintain the bridge for 50 years, according to the North Carolina Turnpike Authority. The Mid-Currituck Bridge will connect U.S. 158 with North Carolina state Highway 12 and will be paid off through tolling. Officials are currently working out toll rates and the amounts needed to guarantee profitability to the eventual winner of the contract. Grupo ACS and its related companies first appeared in June 2008 in Texas when Iridium partnered with U.S.-based Zachry to engineer a portion of the Trans-Texas Corridor specifically the I-69 phase from the Mexican border to the northeast portion of the state. The contract is valued at $1.3 billion according to ACS officials. But TxDOT announced this past week that the Trans-Texas Corridor concept was dead and would be restructured under a new plan. That called into question the future of the I-69 contract to Iridium-Zachry. TxDOT officials had not returned a Land Line request for information at the time of this posting. Meanwhile, Grupo ACS remains the preferred company to build and maintain 10.5 miles of I-595 in Broward County, FL. The project, announced in October 2008, includes tolled lanes that are reversible during emergencies.
1 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PCyozyAoDwsJ:www.landlinemag.com...
Florida Department of Transportation officials are currently working on setting the toll rates on I-595. The state will retain the toll revenue and pay the investors $1.8 billion over 35 years to construct and manage the lanes, an FDOT spokeswoman previously told Land Line. Grupo ACS has also won a contract in Canada to construct and maintain Autoroute 30, a tolled highway connector south of Montreal in the province of Quebec. The Canadian project, also awarded in October, is a 26-mile four-lane toll road worth $1.3 billion U.S. ACS will collect tolls on Autoroute 30 until 2039. By David Tanner, staff writer david_tanner@landlinemag.com
2 of 2
3/11/2012 11:10 PM
REFERENCE MATERIALS
(Provided by Brian D. Hill of USWGO Alternative News (uswgo.com) admin@uswgo.com) Date Finalized: March 10th 2012
United Nations Conference on Environment & Development; Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992; AGENDA 21:
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/Agenda21.pdf
USWGO Interview with Dr. Michael Coffman Ph.D. - March 8 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oATdPEexF34
(If you don't have Internet Access then request to me in person or send me a mailing with a request to send you a DVD copy of the Interview and I will see what I can do) Interview on Agenda 21, connection to ICLEI and the NAFTA Super Highway (Trans-Texas Corridor), Smart Growth, and how it affects local areas. USWGO Alternative News Head Reporter Brian D. Hill interviews Dr. Michael Coffman around March 8 2012 at 5:26PM. The Interview was done via webcam via Skype at 10fps. The audio on the interviewers side is a bit hard to hear so it will be overdubbed or enhanced then a enhanced version will be uploaded later on but subtitles were placed with every question the interviewer asked so that people can understand what questions were asked. Born in 1943, Dr. Michael S. Coffman received his BS in Forestry and MS in Biology at Northern Arizona University at and his Ph.D. in Forest Science at the University of Idaho at Moscow in 1966,1967, and 1970 respectively. Since then he has become a respected scientist and ecologist who was involved in ecosystem research for over twenty years in both academia and industry. He taught courses and conducted research in forest ecology and forest community dynamics for ten years at Michigan Technological University--a leading forestry school in the Midwest. While there, he published a book on forest ecosystem classification in Upper Michigan and Northern Wisconsin, which has become the standard for classification in the region. He also assisted the U.S. Forest Service in developing an Ecological Land Classification System for each of the National Forests in Region-9. http://www.discerningtoday.org/dr__michael_coffman.htm "Understanding Sustainable Development - Agenda 21 - A Guide for Public Officials" http://www.epi-us.com/sd-guide-freedom21.pdf A good book to read "Behind the Green Mask" by Rosa Koire http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/buy-behind-the-green-mask.html
This is all USWGO has for now for the Town Council of Mayodan and state senator Philip E. Berger. Every day we are discovering more information that backs our movement against Agenda 21 and exposing what it really is and that is a ClimateGate fraud not about saving the environment but about control of human activity and resources. Also another scientific fact I like to bring up for anybody who knows and studies science. From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle:
Carbon exists in the Earth's atmosphere primarily as the gas carbon dioxide (CO2). Although it is a small percentage of the atmosphere (approximately 0.04% on a molarbasis), it plays a vital role in supporting life. Other gases containing carbon in the atmosphere are methane and chlorofluorocarbons (the latter is entirely anthropogenic). Trees and other green plants such as grass convert carbon dioxide into carbohydratesduring photosynthesis, releasing oxygen in the process. This process is most prolific in relatively new forests where tree growth is still rapid. The effect is strongest in deciduous forests during spring leafing out. This is visible as an annual signal in the Keeling curveof measured CO2 concentration. Northern hemisphere spring predominates, as there is far more land in temperate latitudes in that hemisphere than in the southern.
That is why you shouldn't believe what Al Gore, George W. Bush, and others said that Co2 greenhouse gases are bad for the environment and that we need to reduce carbon emissions. Reducing carbon beyond a certain point requires reduction of the worlds population which is genocide. I do NOT support genocide that some of the top environmental movement leaders support under carbon taxes, the dreaded Chinese one child policy (Even a news anchor on a news video I saw on the documentary Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement said that having more then one child is what is making the planet worse which is a lie), and population reduction through government run socialist healthcare (Obamacare) and forced vaccinations as Bill Gates stated in his video linked below. Of Course Bill Gates did not say socialist health care but I am sure that will be used in the population reduction scheme.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKIl34rV-3o
Bill Gates stated on the record and I quote Now the world has today 6 billion people, that's headed up to 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent now reducing the human population is population reduction which is killing. Vaccines are included in his argument which means vaccines will also be used to reduce the human population. This is all the facts I have for now. Documentation and Reference material supplied by USWGO Alternative News Founder and Head Reporter(uswgo.com), Brian D. Hill on March 12th 2012. This information should be accurate and on the mark. Any questions should be addressed to the information organizer at admin@uswgo.com. This material will also be posted on Scribd and USWGO on the record.

Agenda 21 Documentation For The Mayodan Town Council

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agenda 21 Documentation For The Mayodan Town Council

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brian D.

URBAN AREAS IN THE UNITED STATES

Area classified as urban by U.S. Bureau of Census

ENDANGERED SPECIES BY COUNTY

FALL 2005 RANGE MAGAZINE

LAND OWNERSHIP IN OREGON/WASHINGTON

LAND CONTROL IN SPOTTED OWL HABITAT

Indian Reservations State & Local Land

Spotted Owl Habitat

WILDLANDS PROPOSALS BY NGOs

SOUTHEASTERN ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK PROJECT

Priority Ecological Areas Significant Ecological Areas

FLORIDA PRIVATE LAND ACQUISITIONS SINCE EARLY 1990s

Taking Liberty on the Web!

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

Presented as a public service from:

For the People and their Public Officials

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

Implementing Sustainable Development ..................... 6

Sustainable Development Land Use Programs ......... 16

What You Can Do ...................................................... 22

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

What is Sustainable Development?

Historical Development and Origins

Which Philosophy of Rights?

U.S. Declaration of Independence U.N. Declaration of Human Rights

The Antithetical Foundations of Liberty and Sustainable Development

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

Implementing Sustainable Development

Using the Law to Restructure Human Nature

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

The International Redistribution of Wealth and the Creation of Public/Private Partnerships

Nature Above Man

Educating the Youth to Mold the Minds of Tomorrow

Stakeholder Councils Restructuring American Government

16. cf. Taylor, Jerry, op cit. 13

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

The Wildlands Network

Image 3: Prepared by Dr. Michael Coffman, Environmental Perspectives, Inc.

Sustainable Development Land Use Programs

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

The North American Union and the Trans-Texas Corridor

Abusing Eminent Domain to Promote Public/Private Partnerships

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

What You Can Do

6 Practical Steps to Restore and Protect Liberty

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 Video:

Freedom Advocates Neighborhood Tools

Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21

The Most Comprehensive Expos of Sustainable Development to Date!

Featuring Five of the Nations Leading Experts:

For the People and their Publ ic Of f icia ls

Sustainable Development: Global to Local Action Plans

A Six Hour Presentation on DVD

Only $49! $29 Special Price with this order form!

Please send me: _ _ _ Understanding Sustainable Development Agenda 21 _ _ _ Sustainable Development:

Yes! I need to know more!

Enclosed is my check or money order for $_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Global to Local Action Plans

Please make checks payable to:

Price: $25.00 (Plus $4.00 shipping)