“Smart Growth” is “Agenda 21″
SUMMARY: From one end of the country to the other, “Smart Growth” has become the politically correct buzz-word to mask a variety of policy initiatives designed to bring about sustainable development of sustainable communities that will produce sustainable lifestyles – as determined by the authors and promoters of Agenda 21… Anything less is a major erosion of the first principle of freedom: legitimate government is empowered by the consent of the governed – not by the recommendations of Agenda 21, the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, or by the “visions” on non-elected professionals, no matter how well-meaning they may be. From one end of the country to the other, “Smart Growth” has become the politically correct buzz-word to mask a variety of policy initiatives designed to bring about sustainable development of sustainable communities that will produce sustainable lifestyles – as determined by the authors and promoters of Agenda 21. From Santa Cruz to Myrtle Beach, hundreds of cities and communities have decided they need a new vision for the future. In all the communities, both the process and the product are remarkably similar; both the process and the product are prescribed in Agenda 21. Birmingham, Alabama began its “visioning” process in 1996, when Dr. Neal Berte, president of Birmingham-Southern College, invited 56 individuals to meet to develop a visioning process that grew into “Region 2020.” The process included 17 different meetings, involving more than 1800 people, who produced 4727 ideas, which were refined into 34 goals, and 217 strategies, which are to be implemented throughout 12 counties. Virtually all the goals are recommendations set forth in Agenda 21. Nearly all the goals are also recommendations set forth by the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). In other words, after all the hoopla of the visioning process, the goals identified by the group are essentially the same goals that both Agenda 21 and the PCSD say should be adopted to promote sustainable development. Tucson’s visioning process produced 17 goals. Surprise, surprise – they are essentially the same goals adopted in Birmingham. Every community’s vision is expressed in localized language, but all contain the essential principles of sustainable development as set forth in Agenda 21. How can hundreds of communities all come to the same conclusions about what is best for the future of their towns? It’s called social engineering. It is the result of skillful manipulation of people in a process called “collaborative consensus building.” It is a process where the outcome is known in advance, and the participants are led to believe that the end product is actually their own.Agenda 21 was adopted in 1992 by 179 nations that attended the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, including the United States. President Bill Clinton created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development by executive order, in 1993. By 1997, the PCSD had developed a full-blown program for implementing Agenda 21 across America, using the agencies of government, and tax dollars. The official report ) of the United States to the U.N. in 1997, reveals the extent to which the Clinton administration was devoted to the global agenda. The Smart Growth Network (SGN), for example, is a nationwide effort coordinated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Urban and Economic Development Division. EPA is supporting the SGN through cooperative partnerships with organizations such as the International City/County Management Association (ICMA).