Monthly Archives: January 2013

A Simple and Short Explanation of How United Nation’s Agenda 21 Sustainable Development Has Slowly Taken Over American Cities

The best way to tell how United Nation’s Agenda 21 Sustainable Development is taking over our American cities is to give an example.   Let’s take a look at one American city: Garland, Texas.  An explanation given by a Garland citizen of over 30 years:

He starts his explanation by reminding us about the strong government push for DART years ago.   It might occur to you, as it has to some of us Garlandites, to think of such a massive amount of money being spent by Local, State and Federal entities to build a rail system which transports no one.  It goes from nowhere to nowhere.  If you watch the trains and the stations, you can immediately see that this is a system which must be heavily subsidized in order to run. It is not making money (typical Government entity).

So, why build such a system?  Good question.
This is where Agenda 21/ICLEI becomes relevant.  Because, the thrust of A21 is to move people into “high density” environments.  The ultimate goal is to bare most of the USA and have it to be off-limits to humans.  All in the name of “Saving the Planet”.

Now that Garland has heavily invested in a rail system but has no one to transport, it launches the next phase—the building of  government (translates
taxpayer) subsidized apartment complexes.  Garland has to get people to the train stations!

Garland has traditionally been a “bedroom community”.  I was first aware of Garland in 1957—it was where people lived but who worked elsewhere in the growing MetroPlex.  Eventually, Garland developed light and some heavy industries and gained fame as a place to purchase automobiles.

Enter the next phase—only in recent times, of course.  Get rid of automobile facilities—of all kinds—and cause people to become dependent upon
Dart!

The City Staff guided this operation.  It convinced the Council (which readily voted “yes”) to establish an “over-lay” on most of downtown, aimed specifically at all things automotive.  This meant, in simple terms, that if an automotive  concern closed its doors for just over 60 days, it could no longer open as an  automotive concern.  Or, if the business were sold, that property could no longer be used as an automotive concern.

Next, the same tactic was planned for  Garland Road and for Forest Lane.  Fortunately, by this time, there was enough concern raised that the Automotive Community arose in unified protest and nixed this over-lay plan.

But the City Staff was busy.  It discovered that it could by-pass any citizen implications by enacting TIFs, in order to collect taxes for continuing its program of pushing automotive and any other “objectionable” business out of these two areas.   By by-passing re-zoning, which would have brought people out to contest such action, the City was able to put into motion the machinery to eventually force businesses out of those areas which  it deems to be “The Gateways Into Garland”.

TIFs instantly inflate the value of properties within their boundaries.  No new taxes—understand!  Just increased “value” to those properties.  This means that those properties now will have to pay more taxes, which accrue to allow the City to proceed with its project of increasing high density ousing and other  features which will contribute to the DART system.

The more the values of the TIF enhanced properties increase, the more tax dollars accrue.  The more taxes those property owners  have to pay, the less viable their business and non-business  properties become.  Eventually, they will be forced to sell.   Hence…the City has achieved its goal of gaining access to  properties which further the Agenda 21 goals.

This tactic flies in the face of the Fundamental Right of USA citizens—To Have and To Enjoy THEIR Properties!

Since Garland built the “5th Street Crossing” (a Public-Private Partnership of high density mixed used apartments on top and shops on bottom), I have watched  persons who live there.  Garland has traditionally been a  family-oriented city.  The new apartments do not reflect this  value at all.  These are not stable families which are contributing to the health of Garland,  They are “commuter”
(transient) persons.

How is this helping the health of Residents and Business and Property Owners of Garland?

What will be the result of this high density push?

All of this was done going against free enterprise.   The market did not choose nor wanted to support these type of developments.   All of these projects had to be driven by government and paid for by high and/or unnecessary and/or hidden taxes.   Many of these projects have or are destroying small businesses and private property rights of the citizens and business owners of Garland.

One examples of these taxes are higher rates in electricity in Garland Power & Light to be siphoned off to a special fund called Economic Development Reserve created specifically to help facilitate growth within Garland.   17 million dollars to be exact to be used for one downtown project and given to a private company (Oaks, L.L.C) for capital to build mixed use apartments.  Mixed use apartments means residence apartments over ground floor retail shops.

Why does Garland electric ratepayers have to pay high dollar for electricity, so the government of Garland can use our over-payments to decide the winners and losers of development and what kind of develop in Garland?

Why the choice of mixed use?  We already have Garland homegrown retailers and restaurants downtown.   Why do we need to bring more competition to an already suffering market?   How will bringing in outside retailers/owners of major chains suppose to help the growth of Garland and Garland folks’ piggy banks?

2 Comments

Filed under Articles