The "vision process," as it is called, may sound good, but ask yourself: why does the city of Oneonta need to pay some outside agency $27,400. to ask the residents a few questions? Especially ask: WHY IS THERE A NEED TO ENTER INTO A 20-YEAR CONTRACT WITH THIS AGENCY?
Let the questions be asked by the Mayor and the City Council, or hire a consultant who is not going to require a long-term contract that will bind future administrations and future citizens into some legal responsibility they may not desire. From the resulting survey, the city, if it so desires, may formulate a city plan. WHAT THE MAYOR IS PROPOSING IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ONEONTA AND THE BIRMINGHAM REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION (not a government agency). THIS CONTRACT, ACCORDING TO THE BLOUNT COUNTIAN, WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL THE YEAR 2020.
Suppose the residents want to change the plan after it has been finalized? The Mayor and the City Council will have to ask the Regional Planning Commission for permission to change the contract. THIS ALTERS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS AND THE CITY GOVERNMENT. The Mayor and the elected council members will then have to answer to two masters -- the voters and the Regional Planning Commission.
Now, city officials are obliged to honor the wishes of the residents or they are voted out of office. After the contract is signed, the Mayor and the City Council can simply say, "WE HAVE A CONTRACT THAT MUST BE HONORED."
Ask yourselves: What is the Birmingham Regional Planning Commission? Who funds it? To whom does it answer? Are we getting more or less government? Are we giving an unelected body we know little about control over the future of our city? Is this vision process the end or the beginning?
We can only answer the last question. It is just the beginning. The next phase is the assessment
phase, then sustainable indicators, then boundaries around population centers. Florida, Maryland
and Minnesota are already in the process of establishing boundaries. These boundaries will limit
expansion and growth and restrict the peoples' rights to use their property. A zoning board is one
thing, a 20-year contract with a virtually unknown entity is something else!
WOULD YOU SIGN A 20-YEAR CONTRACT BEFORE YOU KNEW THE TERMS OF THAT CONTRACT? THAT, IN ESSENCE, IS WHAT THE MAYOR IS ASKING CITIZENS OF ONEONTA TO DO.
 | 28.1 Because so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and cooperation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its objectives. Local authorities construct, operate and maintain economic, social and environmental infrastructure, oversee planning processes, establish local environmental policies and regulations, and assist in implementing national and subnational environmental policies. As the level of governance closest to the people, they play a vital role in educating, mobilizing and responding to the public to promote sustainable development. |
| 28.2 The following objectives are proposed for this programme area: |
| 28.2 (a) By 1996, [we are a bit behind schedule] most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on "a local Agenda 21" for the community; |
| 28.3 Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations and private enterprises and adopt "a local Agenda 21". Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies. The process of consultation would increase household awareness of sustainable development issues. Local authority programmes, policies, laws and regulations to achieve Agenda 21 objectives would be assessed and modified, based on local programmes adopted. Strategies could also be used in supporting proposals for local, national, regional and international funding. |
The following quote is from chapter 3, page 29 of Education for Sustainability, an agenda for action, published by the President's Council on Sustainability:
| Action 6: Community Visioning and Assessment: Encourage partnerships and activities that support community visioning and assessment activities. |
| At the international level, Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) charged communities with formulating action plans to move toward a sustainable future. |
The "Visioning Process" being talked about by the proponents of the partnership between the Regional Planning Commission and the City of Oneonta (and also with the governing body of Blount County) is the approach being used in this country and around the world to bring communities into compliance with the objectives of Agenda 21. We believe the "Region 2020"initiative is also just another track toward that same goal. For all these visioning processes to suddenly crop up in so many different locales seems to us beyond the scope of mere coincidence. In other countries the term "Agenda 21" is readily used in discussions of their visioning sessions. In America it is notably avoided. We have been told by an individual definitely in a position to know that this is a deliberate strategy.
Roanoke, VA; Corpus Christi & Nueces County, Texas; Sisters, Oregon; Vancouver, Canada; Juneau, Alaska; Detroit, Mich.; Brevard County, FL; London, England; Rushmoor, U.K.; Myrtle Beach, SC; Rockville, MD; Blount County, AL; Oneonta, AL; Moody, AL; Alabaster, AL; Pleasant Grove, AL; Racine, Wis.; Portland, Oregon; Chattanooga, TN
Jasper and Springville, AL are scheduled next on the list, and Travelers Rest, SC is now
looking forward to "visioning."
Return to home page / Return to main index / Return to newsletter index / Return to one-pager index