FW: CitizensforPrivatePropertyRights Newsletter--April 2008

------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 17:45:19 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: CitizensforPrivatePropertyRights Newsletter--April 2008

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "db-backcountry" <db-backcountry@prodigy.net>
To: "charlene ayers" <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: CPPR news
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 12:26:53 +0000

Citizens for Private Property Rights for April, 2008. Volume 15, Issue 4. Next board meeting, April 15 at Denny‚s Restaurant, 1946 Main Street, Ramona, Calif. At 6:30 P.M.    Visitors welcome.

∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑.
Many new homes are going up in Ramona to replace those destroyed by the Witch Creek wildfire of last October. Also many factory built homes have been seen passing through town toward their destinations. The Beck home was delivered April 3 and work is progressing. However many homeowners who lost their homes and had little or no insurance are left in a state of despair and really do need help to get back on their feet. Some people who suffered losses in the 2003 Cedar wildfire are still without homes.
∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑∑

Beware! Two Eminent Domain Propositions∑.One of Hope, One of Betrayal      by Fred Schnaubelt
 

Resorting to political dirty tricks, the League of Cities and State Association of Counties have sponsored the GOVERNMENT‚S PROPOSITION 99 on the June ballot to counteract the PEOPLE‚S PROPOSITION 98 which halts eminent domain abuse. Our politicians want to neutralize Proposition 98 by honeyfuggling the voters into believing that their Prop. 99 won‚t betray again.
 
Proposition 98 limits the government‚s ability to take property from present owners and give it to others to make huge profits. It prevents homes, small businesses and churches from being condemned for the benefit of big-box stores and sports arenas. It decontrols rental units when a protected tenant moves freeing up the unit to be re-rented at fair market value. It restores the 5th amendment to the Constitution.
 
Proposition 98 does not abolish existing rent controls in California. It doesn‚t stop the „taking‰ of property for legitimate public uses such as roads, bridges, fire stations, etc. It won‚t prevent the government from closing toxic waste dumps, abating public nuisances nor prevent the use of zoning, land use planning or stop the government from protecting the environment.
 
Honeyfuggle is defined as: „to ingratiate so as to cheat or deceive,‰ and politicians are masters at it in their pursuit of money, power and votes. The League of Cities et al., are acting illegally by using public funds (your money) to promote a self-serving cause according to the Orange County Register (March 8, 2008). The article reports:
 
„The evidence strongly suggests that public dollars are being used inappropriately,‰ said a statement from Congressman John Campbell, who co-authored a complaint to the California Fair Political Practices Commission. In it, the League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties and the California Redevelopment Association are accused of using public funds for partisan campaigns and of concealing the identity of donors to their political action committees. „The second measure known as the Homeowners Protection Act, or Prop. 99, is backed by groups who actually opposed eminent domain reforms in 2006. Yet, those same groups now portray themselves as the only true voice of reform.‰
 
Opponents of Proposition 98 claim it will prevent government from forcing investors and builders against their will into supplying „affordable units‰ in brand new housing projects.
 
Historically, affordable housing has been older existing, cheaper housing, not brand new state of the art housing. Or it was before local governments made it virtually illegal to privately build affordable housing by adding on hundreds of onerous costly laws. Oddly, these laws were not needed when highly desirable neighborhoods such as Del Cerro, Pt. Loma, Mission Hills and La Jolla were built-out.
 
Simply put, if government wants voters to live in brand new housing, then in fairness, shouldn‚t the public pay for it, and not make property owners alone bear the cost?
 
According to the University of Michigan study, NEW HOMES AND POOR PEOPLE, the construction of 1,000 new dwelling units, both homes and apartments, makes it possible for 3,545 households to move to better accommodations. Of the 3,545 moves surveyed, 1,290 were by low and moderate-income families. This is the essence of upward mobility as part of a chain of moves. Anyone who didn‚t move to a new house when they left their parents home (99% of us), know how it works. Used housing is „affordable housing.‰ Not all used housing, of course, but the private market supplies far more housing for low to middle income people than all the government programs together. It just isn‚t expensive, brand new housing.
 
Proposition 98 will require local government to return to the policies that enabled 50 times as many people to live in privately built housing as now line up for government mandated „affordable housing.‰ With a severe housing shortage, the press never explains why thousands of new homes/apartments should be subsidized while thousands of privately to-be-built homes/apartments should be scuttled∑.sometimes in the same neighborhoods. Or, why poor people deserve to live in expensive new housing while the overwhelming majority of self-supporting tenants must live in older housing.
 
The non-partisan Legislative Analyst‚s Office stipulates that the GOVERNMENT‚S PROPOSITION 99∑‰would not change significantly current government land acquisition practices‰ (page 3). Aha! Betrayed again by our politicians!
 
They add that THE PEOPLE‚S PROPOSITION 98, on taxes, the net statewide fiscal effect would not be significant‰ (page 8).
 
However, THE PEOPLE‚S PROPOSITION 98, while not raising taxes, hopefully will constrain the government‚s land acquisition practices. Read the Legislative Analyst‚s reports before believing the baloney put out by the opponents of private property rights.

 
Guejito Rancho Coveted by Environmentalists, Politicians and Bureaucrats    by Darrell Beck
 

The Guejito (wa-he-ta) Rancho is the only intact Mexican land grant still remaining in San Diego County. The 23,000 acre rancho lies on a mesa between the city of Escondido and the unincorporated town of Ramona and north or San Pasqual Valley. The large undeveloped area, used primarily for cattle grazing, is not accessible with roads or modern infrastructure and is owned by the Benjamin Coates heirs who are represented by Attorney Henry Rupp.
 
Due to the recent death of Mr. Coates there has been considerable interest by politicians, bureaucrats and environmentalists who covet this vacant land to seek control of the vast rancho. Ever since Mr. Rupp entertained the idea of development and annexation to the City of Escondido, the newspapers have been filled with chatter about „buying‰ the rancho or suggestions that the Coates heirs should „donate‰ it to someone like the Nature Conservancy as a „legacy.‰
 
The San Dieguito River Park Joint Powers Authority voted to include the rancho within their Focus Planning Area by reaching well beyond the original boundaries of the San Dieguito River Park plan thus allowing government authority to place an onerous cloud over the land title. Even the maps published in local newspapers identify the land as the „Rancho Guejito Preserve‰ thereby showing how our enviro-government has already made plans to take the land by hook or by crook.
 
Even San Diego County Supervisor, Bill Horn, a once strong property rights advocate who has held power too long, has turned soft by teaming up with Endangered Habitats League President, Dan Silver in an attempt to go to Washington and get two hundred million dollars to buy the rancho for „preservation‰ despite the fact that the Guejito representatives have indicated they don‚t want to sell. Adding to this shot-gun sale, North County Times editorialist, John Van Doorn flagrantly accuses the owners of being „un-American‰ for not wanting to sell their land.
 
Over the past twenty or so years the radical environmental community has been busy influencing government and forcing their way into power through every kind of conceivable lawsuit, adding to the cost of doing business and in many ways denying American citizens their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The environmentalists always want to „save‰ open space by having the government purchase the land with public funds but are never ready to spend their own funds to buy the land. In the end the government holds the land that environmentalists don‚t really want anyone to use for practical purposes. The government then must remove the land from the tax rolls and finds that it has no funds to properly care for the vast amounts of open space it now owns. A good example of government mismanagement occurred during the recent Cedar and Witch Creek Fires where the „saved critical habitat‰ turned out t o be a tremendous amount of fuel to sustain a huge wildfire causing great damage and pain.
 
Good advice that the radical environmentalists and those they influence never seem to practice is The Golden Rule: „Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.‰
 

Environmentalists, Bureaucrats and Politicians love the habitat to death.    
By Darrell Beck
 

Since our too-long-in-the-saddle San Diego County Board of Supervisors acted in 1997 to create the infamous Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) they have been busy as beavers taking land though various regulatory means, purchases and subtle extortion to „save critical habitat‰ for endangered species. During that time they have created the San Dieguito River Park, the MSCP and are looking hard at the El Monte Park on the San Diego River as well as showing strong interest in taking all of the major rivers in San Diego County.
 
All of this land grab amounts to many hundreds of thousands of acres in a county where government ownership already exceeds 65% of the land in the county. Once the people have been completely bamboozled by their benevolent effort to preserve habitat for endangered species you can be sure they will incrementally expand their interests to include the „watersheds‰ which will include control of everything left over.
 
But something important happened in 2003 and 2007 that contradicts the county‚s effort to save critical habitat. The supervisors were suddenly awakened to the fact that critical habitat, otherwise known as brush by old-timers, is flammable and needs to burn off occasionally. It is just a fact of nature that the brush must burn in order to maintain a healthy forest and its wildlife. So by trying to save the brush the authorities are actually mismanaging their valuable habitat. They are also endangering the lives and fortunes of all the people in the county by loving the habitat to death.
 
Recently the supervisors have requested funds from the State of California in order to „clear the brush.‰ So all of a sudden they want to clear the brush that they are trying to save. The supervisors are truly confused and need help desperately and I hate to say we told them so when they were creating this monstrous land grab in cooperation with the federal government.
 
First they need to stop listening to the radical environmentalists and bureaucrats because neither of these factions have an ounce of common sense. Second they need to follow the Golden Rule by ceasing to covet everyone else‚s land and stop taking more private property for open space, habitat, animal corridors, parks, etc. And finally they need to realize that all of that „critical habitat which is fuel for the next wildfire‰ must be properly managed through control burning, brush clearing of fire breaks and maintenance through grazing and better use of the land.
 

Mismanagement of Habitat by Government Authorities in San Louis Rey River  by Darrell Beck
 

For almost ten years bureaucrats, environmentalists, politicians, extremists, Coastal Commission, State Dept. of Fish and Game, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Army Corp of Engineers have been fighting over how to care for the flooding problem and invasive habitat in the San Louis Rey River. Finally in February, after a ten year war between people who want to save a bird and its habitat v. people who want to save people and their habitat, the Corp. had a permit to go in and clear the overgrowth from the channel to reduce the fire hazard and so water could actually flow downstream without flooding over the banks.
 
Part of the problem began after the Corp had earlier built a levee system and was required to plant more than 100 acres of new bird habitat as „mitigation for unavoidable impacts‰ within the river channel. This man-made habitat quickly attracted the endangered Bells-vireo in greater numbers than had existed there previously. Just as the Corp. was preparing to start clearing with their big machines in late February it was time to stop work for the nesting season of the birds from March to September.
 
We will never get the common sense of our pioneers back until we eliminate the influence of the radical environmental movement; a false movement that is at war with the environment and the people.
 

Irresponsible management of Santa Maria Creek by the authorities led to extreme fire damage  
by Darrell Beck
 

During the Witch Creek Fire of October, 2007 we found that the Santa Ana winds generally follow the course of water and twist down the canyons toward the sea. By observing the aftermath of the fire in the Ramona area it was obvious that the winds carried the fires down the canyons and followed the water courses through the valley.
 
It was particularly obvious that when the fire reached the brush-line at the base of the mountains range on the east side of the valley it spread quickly down the Santa Maria Creek that was choked with overgrowth that had been allowed to flourish since the floods of 1980. This was a growth of trees and bush that had never existed prior to the floods but was now considered by the authorities to be untouchable critical habitat. This was the path that the fire took that eventually jumped Elm Street and burned sparse stubble that destroyed seven properties and eventually reached and destroyed our place as we had been ordered to evacuate and were not there to protect our property. When we returned, we found that the authorities were also unable to protect our property.
 
This is especially troubling to me as I had always been extra careful to maintain a 500 foot clearance and keep the property defensible. But making matters more disturbing is my recollection that when some local park volunteers tried to clear the overgrowth from the Santa Maria Creek about ten years ago they were stopped by the Army Corp. of Engineers (after being reported by a local snitch) to cease and desist from clearing the creek due to the presence of endangered species and critical habitat. The Corp. threatened the volunteers with jail time and fines, thus the clearing was halted and the overgrowth was allowed to thrive only to create plenty of fuel for the Witch Creek Fire.
 
It just seems to me that if the authorities make the claim that they, and only they, are capable of managing the habitat they have been taking, then they should hold total responsibility for any damage it causes to the people as the result of flood and fire. What do you think?
 

The Sunrise Power link; another Environmental hallucination    by Darrell Beck
 

Some years ago, radical environmental influence demanded that the California State Legislature make laws requiring that utilities in the state begin generating power from „renewable‰ sources such as geothermal, sun and wind. As a result, the local utilities have been trying to build the Sunrise Power Link, a high voltage transmission line to be erected from the deserts (or Mexico where environmental constraints don‚t exist) across the State Park, backcountry ranches and private property to serve San Diego.
 
Naturally almost every environmentalist that had demanded the use of „natural‰ power is now opposed to the transmission line because they claim it looks ugly, will destroy the environment, is a fire hazard etc. But plenty of people other than environmentalists are opposed to the power link for various other reasons. Many are opposed to the power link because it‚s not necessary. If only we would stop listening to the radical environmentalists and enter the 21st Century, we would be investing in nuclear power that could be generated nearby without erecting more towers in the backcountry. Here nuclear power could also be used for desalinization of seawater.

The Wisdom of History  by Darrell Beck
 

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
 
„A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.‰
 
„A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.‰
 
„From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.‰
 
„The average age of the world‚s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years.‰
 
„During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back to bondage.‰
 
We must realize that the presidential candidates today are promising everything from free cheese to the kitchen sink so long as we become dependent upon government entitlements and other free hand-outs. If we take the bait, we may never know that our legacy to our successors will be back to bondage.
 

End

 
 

------ End of Forwarded Message