Agenda21issues

There are other like-minded Americans in California and all over our great nation. We are not alone in our heightened concerns.

It should steam or frost you that the elected officials appear so disinterested in or don't understand the threats to our Life, Liberty, and Property from the United Nations and UN Agenda 21. This is not an isolated phenomena either.

A plank opposing UN Agenda 21 has been placed in the RNC platform. It is time to bone up on this subject. Other than in emails, I have not heard a whisper of this in the Main Stream Media. This is a PROFOUND ISSUE. We need to take charge of our destinies. We should set our own priorities not the media or the politicians. (A good resource for your research is CitizensReviewOnline. The citizens who are putting this together and paying for it are Olympic Peninsula Patriots. Give it a try.)
Karl Spees, Pres. of Capr 13

After hearing citizen complaints that the application for a “Sustainable Communities Grant” came with too many strings attached and is
a United Nations Agenda 21 item which violates the constitution, the Sutter County Board of Supervisors at their January 31st meeting voted
5-0 to not apply for the grant. Those speaking against the grant were primarily members of the Yuba-Sutter Tea Party Patriots.

Several of the same citizens who passionately addressed the Sutter County Board of Supervisors meeting did so again the following
evening, February 1, at the Live Oak City Council in opposition to Item 2 on their agenda, "Applying for a Sustainable Communities Planning
Grant." Some of the Live Oak City Council appeared uninterested in listening to comments from the public. Mayor Gary Baland, who is up for reelection this year, appeared visibly bored (staring off into space, checking what the other council members were doing, scanning the outer portions
of the room) and rarely, if ever, made eye contact with any of the speakers. Larry Virga, a resident of Sutter County and the first member of the public to speak, informed the council they have competent Live Oak employees who can do the planning or they can contract with local assistance rather than pay outside consultants with strings attached who will tie their hands behind their backs. He implored the Council to actually read the
application to see what they will be signing away.

Judi Caler, resident of Nevada City, UN Agenda 21 expert, founder of ROAR (Reclaiming Our American Rights), and author of “Agenda 21 vs. the United States Constitution,” concluded her comments by advising the Council to wait until they become educated about Agenda 21. The council was
disinterested with her offer to return with her 35-minute Power Point presentation about Agenda 21. Carla Virga read the recent “RNC Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21,” which included, “Resolved, that the federal and state and local governments across the country be well informed of the underlying harmful implication of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development” and we hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it.”Mayor Baland admonished the speakers, saying the board was not there to hear about Agenda 21, they only wanted to hear comments about the proposal on their agenda.

Councilmember Diane Hodges, the Live Oak representative on the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), which is charged with implementing the Metropolitan Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Project, asked Satwant Takhar, Finance Director, about this grant of taxpayer money. Estimating they have received $35 million in grants over the last year (approximately $4,170 per person in Live Oak), he replied they would get $150,000 to use as they request towards the preparation of the City of Live Oak Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. This was absolutely false. The City of Live Oak
will get consulting services (probably ICLEI-certified and out-of- area) from the Strategic Growth Council; and the $150,000 will be applied against those consulting services. Takhar stated there would be no strings, and the city can back out at any time. NOT TRUE. Once this taxpayer money is approved, they will pay for the consultant, for the consultant’s "visioning" meetings, and for the "facilitators" for all of the Delphi meetings with citizens
to meet the public input meeting requirements. If the city doesn't like the plan the Strategic Growth Council consultant wants to implement in Live Oak, Live Oak must immediately pay back the $150,000, plus interest and administration costs. The purpose of the grant of taxpayer money is to ensure communities comply with AB32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and SB375, the California Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. It appears none who spoke or voted for this taxpayer grant has read the grant’s requirements and application.

For example, how will the Live Oak City Council "certify" that "threshold requirements outlined in the guidelines, including consideration of Ocean Protection Council Sea Level Rise Guidance will be met"? This is one of the many requirements stated in the application and taken directly from
AB32 and SB375. The Council members discussed the fact they have already received $35 million in grant funds. Indeed, just two weeks earlier, the Live Oak City Council applied for another “Sustainable Communities” grant. They obviously do not understand the threat of Agenda 21 and refuse
to learn in their conviction they are smarter than all the people who took time to speak before them. Greedy for grant money, the City Council voted 4-1 to apply for this grant. Rob Klotz, a candidate for Sutter County Supervisor, District 1, was the lone dissenting vote. After all, when you run your city with grant money -- $35 million in one year for a population of 8,392 people -- what's another $150,000?