Page 94 - Agenda 21

Page 94 of 121

An Act Relating to due process; to prohibit the Commonwealth of 6 Massachusetts and its political
subdivisions from adopting and developing environmental and developmental policies that, without
due process, would infringe or restrict the private property rights of the owner of the property.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/119931924/Massachusetts-Bill-to-Kick-Agenda-21-out-of-the-State-
HD358

52. AGENDA 21 IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

New Hampshire elected officials have no voting power on community planning policies created by
“Granite State Future which has legally bound itself to the Federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development! Local planning decisions are controlled by the Federal Government! Supposedly the
Regional Planning Commissions’ plans are advisory only, but there are mandatory Federal outcomes.
“These mandatory outcomes are clearly outlined in the foundational Grant Instrument, and all
connected documents that are part and parcel to the legally binding grant instrument (HUD-1044)
signed by the Nashua Regional Planning Commission, the lead Planning Commission.”

“The foundation of Granite State Future is the consortium of the nine New Hampshire Regional
Planning Commissions. The Nashua Regional Planning Commission (NRPC) is the lead commission
and issues orders and directives to the other eight commissions.

Special interest groups, called “stakeholders”, have direct input into state policy. It is imperative to
note that appointed, not elected, officials as well as outside special-interest groups are the primary
decision makers in the Granite State Future. New Hampshire state agencies that are staffed with
unelected bureaucrats are at the core of decision making in Granite State Future as well as Pay-to-Play
partners.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/122645018/Granite-State-Future-The-Real-Facts-by-Tim-Carter

53. AGENDA 21 ATTEMPTED GOVERNMENT LAND GRAB OF THE
WHITE RIVER WATERSHED IN MISSOURI AND ARKANSAS

“U.S. Department of the Interior dropped the White River [Watershed National
Blueway designation]. The decision to rescind the National Blueway designation for the 700-plus-
mile river, which flows through southern Missouri and parts of Arkansas, had the support of
opponents and one-time backers alike. Opponents said the designation, given in January, could lead
to new regulations or land seizures.”

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) issued this response:

“The Obama Administration’s attempt to establish a new federal designation without the approval of
Congress or public input is absolutely unacceptable. The stakeholders and community members
deserve more transparency from their government. I’m pleased the Obama Administration has
withdrawn this designation.”

U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-Ark.) issued this response:
“We all agree that we should work to protect our waterways, but a new federal Blueway program is not
necessary to improve the cooperation of federal and state agencies on the management of the White
River. This designation occurred without a formal process – no public comment, lack of transparency
from the federal government, and without the broad support of Arkansans. We are happy to see that
Secretary Jewell reviewed the program and heard the concerns of our citizens."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-rescinds-white-rivers-blueway-designation-
19573511#.UdTbIztOOSp