VOLUME 5, NUMBER 14 - DECEMBER 15, 2000
THE POWER TO DESTROY
Someone has said that the power to tax is the power to destroy. It doesn't take one long to realize the truth of that
statement. In light of that, and looking at what is happening in Alabama (and many other states) we have a question to
ask the citizenry:
DO YOU WANT TO GIVE AN APPOINTED COMMISSION THE POWER TO TAX YOU WITHOUT THEIR DECISIONS EVER HAVING TO BE ACTED UPON BY THE LEGISLATURE?
If your answer is yes, go back to sleep. If your answer is no you had better wake up to what is happening in Montgomery.
The Birmingham News carried an article, "55 named to environmental panel," in its July 27, 2000, edition. That article talks about the governor's new Commission on Environmental Initiatives, created by executive order in a restructuring of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management. According to the News' article, "The commission's members include at least 20 environmentalists, 10 representatives of industry, heads of several state agencies and first lady Lori Allen Siegelman." Since then additional members have been appointed, bringing the total to 63. Twenty-five are easily identified as environmentalists and a number of others head up state operations involved in environmentalism. There is one "farmer" on the list.
Forty-four or forty-five of this group met on December 6, 2000, and purportedly came to a consensus agreement for the total membership in support of 60 proposals. Citizens in attendance at that meeting have said the meeting was never officially called to order; there was no agenda available; there was no discussion of "old business" or "new business;" the 60 proposals were never discussed and were voted on by a simple show of hands with each voter reading the item for himself, the item simply being referred to by number from the podium. A number of those voting expressed concern that they were voting on proposals they had no real knowledge about since different committees from the group had worked on the different proposals. One individual, the Commissioner of Agriculture, left in a huff, protesting that the so-called meeting was a sham. Several others present at the beginning of the session left before the vote was completed. After lunch, with less than half of the 63 members available to vote, a resolution offered by Doug Ghee to establish an environmental board to work with the Commerce Commission and to push the issue of "smart growth" against sprawl was supposedly passed by a show of hands. There was some heated discussion over this issue.
The Speaker of the House, Seth Hammett, was the guest speaker and spoke about what he learned on his trip to Georgia to study their approach to controlling sprawl, one of the goals of the Commission and a code-word being used across the country in regionalization planning which will establish boundaries around urban areas that will prevent outward expansion. "The Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) has been given considerable power to dictate not only transportation decisions but also land use in a 13-county metropolitan region of Atlanta....In addition, Governor Barnes, who also acts as the GRTA's chairman, has proposed land set-asides on a county-by-county basis."
When a single state agency can dictate land and transportation decisions in a 13 county region it is an agency with considerable power and great control over how individual citizens as well as businesses may use their own property. We see the Georgia model being used to construct a similar agency in Alabama.
Some of the proposals to come out of the December 6 meeting call for the creation of committees or agencies that would be given wide latitude in their efforts to reach goals that are ill defined. In other words, the fine print has not yet been inserted into the "contracts."
"Create a Toxics Use Reduction Office within appropriate agency, such as ADEM, to help implement technologies to reduce the use of toxic chemicals and promote pollution prevention. Include the reduction of air and water toxics from industries, agriculture, households, point and non-point source, mobile and area sources." Note the word "households" in this proposal. The home use of such items as chlorine bleach, household insecticides and herbicides or any other toxic or polluting materials would come under scrutiny. The farmers' use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides would be monitored. Fines and fees (another form of taxation) could be imposed.
"We recommend developing a water withdrawal permitting system for groundwater and surface water. A [Governor's] stakeholder group of all interested parties should be convened as soon as possible to determine more specifically how this permitting system would function." The amount of water you would be allowed to withdraw from the well on your property might no longer be determined by nature's supply but by government edict. You could be required to pay a per gallon fee (tax) for its use.
"We endorse the Clean Water Action Plan process and the watershed approach it employs." Everyone lives in a watershed. Water that falls on your property makes its way into some river(s) or lake(s). The quality of the water in that river or lake depends to some extent on the conditions on your land. If you own cattle, their waste is washed into a stream somewhere or into the underground aquifer which eventually ends up in some lake or river. If you farm and use fertilizer and pesticides they will be washed into streams, lakes or rivers somewhere. The cost of cleaning the water in that stream, lake or river to make it comply with the Clean Waters Act as the bureaucrats have interpreted it is a cost you may be called upon to help pay in the form of a purchased permit or a fee or a fine.
"Strengthen current programs on the local & state level regulating septic systems & encourage funding support." If you live in the county and are on a septic system you may be required to purchase an annual permit to use such a system and the system may be monitored periodically to ensure it is in compliance with whatever standards the bureaucrats have established.
"Investigate ways to fund and standardize a statewide stormwater management plan to simplify the system for builders and homeowners. The plan should include permeable paving and tax incentives for alternative paving materials and methods that would incorporate the 22 Model Principles For Better Site Design." We wondered about the 22 Model Principles and one of the citizens asked a couple of the members. They also did not know what those 22 principles are... but they voted for it anyway. Gives one a nice warm feeling to know that our appointed officials are looking after our interests.
"We support adding the 22 Model Principles for Better Site Design to the Non-Point Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) program." and "We support an Executive Order from the Governor that urges the state adopt the 22 Model Principles For Better Site Design on all new state construction." Whatever it is, it sounds good so let's vote for it.
"The State of Alabama aggressively should secure Federal monies to support roadside beautification efforts. Additionally, promote the planting of native wildflowers on roadsides." We all know that federal monies come with strings attached and those strings bode ill for state sovereignty.
"Promote Alabama Trails by developing a coordinated trails plan that includes: bicycle, pedestrian trails, greenway systems, water trails, and other designated trails." Guess who pays the bill?
"Develop plans to address statewide uniform prescribed burning and invasive species. Encourage the development of incentives and support ongoing public/private continuous efforts to promote the use of public/private efforts prescribed burning and preservation of landowners right to use this practice as an effective Forestry/wildlife Management tool." You may not have thought about it but humans are an invasive species in most areas of America. Here we see the "public/private" codewords that denote a partnership arrangement between government and some private organization, in this instance most likely an environmental organization like the Sierra Club. We are quite sure it would not be a farmer's or a timber cooperative.
"Pursue effective control and full compliance with Clean Water Act criteria regarding sanitary/sewage and stormwater discharge/run-off for both rural and municipal areas." Once again we are into the watershed area that will effect every citizen in the state.
"Development and implementation of thorough/ "state-of-the-art" standards for monitoring, testing and correcting indoor contaminants and air pollution." and "Development and implementation of a comprehensive program of risk assessment." We, like a number of the voters, don't really know exactly what these recommendations mean. What are indoor contaminants and what risks are we to assess?
Some of you already know that the EPA is not a friend to the farmer, to the timber industry nor to a number of other business enterprises, but if you think things are bad now, just wait until Siegelman's appointed boards and committees begin looking into things. Already the Georgia RTA (Regional Transportation Agency), which now houses their environmental enforcement arm, is flexing its muscle. We are in receipt of a copy of a letter it wrote to the Cobb County Commission informing it of its intention to "activate jurisdiction over Cobb County during its regular meeting..." And we know Siegelman has been sending folks over to Georgia to check on how things are done. We all need to check with our Montgomery legislators to find out where they stand on these issues, and we need to let them know exactly where we stand on them.