Developing Natural Heritage 2020 is an ambitious undertaking and in recognition of this fact, the County is partnering with the Sierra Business Council (SBC), a local organization with demonstrated expertise in conservation planning, public participation strategy design and other skills, to help complete the project.
This was all funded by the Packard Foundation.
The Navy is certainly a good organization.
It was Amendment 24 in Colorado in 2000, with mentions of "smart growth," "sustainable development" and the like. We defeated it. ...might have also been a county (non-amendment) ballot issue on that here then. Hedgetrimmer, you might want to have your Oklahoma acquaintainces search and look over the information on the Web about the Colorado episode.
Keywords: colorado "Amendment 24"
(with the quotes)
You'll see many more hits than the following with those keywords in the search engine.
Basic information on Amendment 24
Basic information on Amendment 24
Submitted by Roxanne Fry on 07:55:23 09/23/00:
Amendment 24, a proposal by the Colorado Environmental Coalition, mandates that local governments comply with statewide provisions stipulated in the amendment to limit growth. Under the amendment, local governments must designate committed growth areas where development is underway and designate future growth areas where development may occur over a determined period of time. The voters at a November election shall approve these Growth area maps, and a corresponding growth impact statement. Any subsequent amendment to the Growth Area Map must be placed before the voters within the jurisdiction at a subsequent November election. This 2,200-word amendment to the Colorado Constitution opens the doors to serious implications for affordable housing, agriculture, economic development, and business.
· IMPOSSIBLE TO GROW YOUR BUSINESS. The amendment locks us into a growth area or a no growth area, and then makes it virtually impossible to obtain approval for business expansion, office buildings, commercial centers, and development, much less future schools, roads, and homes outside of urban areas.
· REDUCED LAND VALUES. If voters fail to approve growth area maps, farm and ranch land near urban areas would diminish in value dramatically.
· COSTLY LITIGATION. The threat of litigation will prevent local governments from instating Smart Growth management plans.
· INFRINGES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. Landowners trying to divide even one tract of land would be prohibited from doing so unless voters approve an amendment to a growth area map.
· HOUSING COSTS. This amendment will drive up the costs of new homes and restricts the available affordable housing. Housing will be so expensive that many of our public servants like teachers, policemen and firefighters will not be able to live in the communities they serve.
· COSTLY ELECTIONS. Requires costly and confusing citywide and countywide elections once a year to amend growth maps to allow any growth. All plans of would be sent to all voters prior to election.
· ENDS LOCAL CONTROL. Requires the consent of adjacent local governments to change a growth area map. The initiative says that growth area maps shall not conflict with or overlap existing or proposed growth areas of another local government. So one local government can be held hostage by a neighboring government. The initiative transfers a portion of the approval process from those living in a locality to citizens in adjacent towns and counties.
· FORCES A $60 MILLION PRICE TAG ON TAXPAYERS. This measure wastes your taxes on red tape and severely reduces hard to come by affordable housing. It will push unfounded mandates on local government. Crippling financial obligations will be imposed on cites and counties.
· ADDS 2200 WORDS TO THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION. Amends the Constitution with over 2200 words of complex procedures to limit local governments and to outline citizens management of growth. This one-size-fits-all approach opens the door to devastating unintended consequences.