Harbison: It's Only a Plan, Not an Ordinance

Jim Harbison

For the last three weeks I have written about the environmental activist’s efforts driven by the United Nations Agenda 21, under the guise of “sustainability”, to fundamentally change the nature of American society. It became very obvious that the general public has very little knowledge of the impacts of this UN agenda. Furthermore, few people, including our own City Council, have taken either the time or effort to understand the ultimate objectives of this program. Instead they see “sustainability” as a method of obtaining Federal dollars to achieve their own social agendas.

Sustainability is one of the UN’s environmentalist programs that advocate “social equity” which is another term for wealth redistribution. An underlying philosophy of UN’s Agenda 21 is that “Land … cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social injustice.” Social equity is a remedy for the poor and minorities to reclaim lands that the middle and upper classes have allegedly stolen from them through economic means. There are serious private property implications that are imposed by these theoretically beneficial sustainability initiatives.

Cities across America have become willing participants in the attempt through the sustainability movement to fundamentally change and “socially redesign” American society. Cities belong to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and yet appear to be unaware of the major tenets of the organization or are deliberately concealing those objectives from the public. The City of Las Cruces is complicit in this effort. Adoption of their proposed sustainability plan requires the City to comply with the UN’s International Energy Conservation Code which is based on global warming theory even though the United States government has refused to be regulated by this code. This plan was tabled at Tuesday’s City Council meeting until the March 7th Council meeting.

All the Councilors stated that the plan was well done but needed some modifications. Most wanted it adopted immediately and changes made in the future. Councilors Sorg and Pedroza commended it for its “social equity” components. Councilor Connor expressed concerns that this draft plan included 22 policies that have not been brought before the Council. The Mayor told the Council that is was just a plan and would not have the impact of an ordinance. It becomes alarming when our elected officials summarily discount the unintended consequences of any plan which will drive the policies of the city for the next twenty years, or worse, deliberately attempt to deceive the public about them.

While I support efforts to improve our society I am deeply concerned when any government entity fails to disclose the true intent of any initiative that clandestinely attempts to “socialize” America no matter how noble the primary cause may seem to be.

The old expression of it being “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” seems to be more than appropriate when it comes to adopting international sustainability initiatives. Developing local government policies and ordinances based on standards developed by the United Nations but not adopted by the United States government are inappropriate and unacceptable. I am not willing to forfeit US sovereignty for some perceived “higher” good which leads to a “One World” government that is permeated by those envious of the success and quality of life experienced by the American people. I would encourage everyone to go to: http://www.freedomadvocates.org to learn about the ‘good, bad, and ugly” implications of sustainability and let your local government know your opinions.

Harbison: It's Only a Plan, Not an Ordinance