Randy Luallin
301 East St
Louisville Colorado 80027
303-665-4995
Transfer of Development Rights from a libertarians point of view. When considering a new law, code or statute two things must be considered before you proceed. The first is the constitutional litmus test. In the case of TDR's it does not. The constitution requires equal treatment under the law. TDR's give an unequal advantage by the use of economics. Simply put, if you have enough money you may continue to build on your property whatever size home you wish since you may purchase "rights". If you do not have enough monetary clout you will have to fit your home into the criteria placed upon you by others. The second criteria is the question, who should decide? Who should decide what you do with your body?, Who should decide how your children should be educated? Who should decide how you build your home? The answer is of course YOU. The propensity of the existing democratic political machine in Boulder County is that they know better than you what is best for you. The declaration of inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is dismissed. At the very base level you either have rights or you do not have rights. They cannot be bought, sold or traded. They are not negotiable. The TDR program fundamentally is a disenfranchisement of rights from the individual to a corporate (allegedly benevolent , better informed) government watching out for YOU. The law books are full of such laws, codes and statutes now outdated and without application to todays lifestyles and situations but still binding. The Transfer of Development Rights program should be rejected for all of these reasons. The size of a persons house is a temporal issue and can and will be better influenced by economics, education and dialog by thinking, informed and conscience individuals, not by a dictatorial measure.
"For God and Country
We associate ourselves together
For the following purpose:
To uphold and defend
The Constitution of the United States of America;
To maintain law and order;
To foster and perpetuate
A one hundred per cent Americanism;
To preserve the memories of and incidents
Of our association in the Great Wars,
To inculcate a sense of individual obligation
To the Community, State, and Nation;
To combat the autocracy
Of both the classes and masses;
To make right the master of might;
To promote peace and good will on earth;
To safeguard and transmit to posterity
The principles of Justice, Freedom and Democracy;
To consecrate and sanctify our Comradeship
By our devotion to mutual helpfulness."
This is the preamble for the American Legion, from the first time I read it I related to it and wanted to be a part of this organization. Sadly like our Constitution few members have read this and get inspired by it. I have it on my refrigerator door and reflect on it often. As a Libertarian it sings to me and keeps me going. I submit it to my associates and friends to inspire them whether you are a veteran or not. in liberty Randy Luallin
The Libertarian National Convention
Moving thru the crowded 16th Street mall of Downtown Denver you will see people from all walks of life enjoying the sunny Memorial Day weekend. At the East end of the street in the Sheraton Hotel complex you will also find the Libertarian Party's National Convention. Feel free to go inside and mingle not only with the delegates from every State in the country but the presidential candidates themselves. These include a medical research analyst, a Harvard professor, successful business entrepreneurs , a former Democratic U.S. Senator from Alaska and a former Republican U.S. Representative from Georgia. You will find booths to inform you on issues across the board from medical marijuana and gold and silver investment opportunities, Native American literature to Muslim education. There are classes on fully informed Jury rights to citizen petition and initiative processes. The air is charged with excitement and anticipation of the upcoming debates. What you will not find is high security, secrecy and of course corporate owned media, hmmmmmmm. While the Republican and Democratic parties siphon off taxpayer funds for their private primaries in every county in every state to the tune of millions of dollars, and while these same parties receive tax money for their personal security needs the Libertarian Party expects and receives none. The motto of personal liberty coupled with personal responsibility is not just touted but walked. The presidential Debates are refreshing with realistic direct questions and straightforward answers and solutions to todays issues and problems. This is Americanism at its best! In the end the selection is made. For President Bob Barr a former Republican Representative from Georgia who candidly asked for forgiveness for having supported the Patriot Act and the War on Drugs in the past and committing himself to the return of freedom to the american people and ceasing the meddling in the affairs of other countries. As his running mate, Allyn Root a self made business man from Nevada full of energy dedicated to making American strong again via the free market that made it strong in the first place. Both are committed to returning within the perimeters of Government outlined in the constitution including the Executive Branch's duty to not make policy but execute the policy made by the peoples representatives. This is just the first step in what will be a long road to return to freedom , liberty and justice for all. This road will require the election of liberty minded representatives of the people starting from the the very root and core level City, County, State and then up to the Federal Level. This is the only party that promises to get government out of your Billfold, out of your Bedroom, out of your Business, and off your back and it will deliver! What it requires is change. Change from the two party system that has strangled the american taxpayer and methodically removed liberty's and rights . In this dynamic age of computers and information we no longer need to be held hostage by corporate selective media output. WE have the ability to know and power to make change happen. CHOOSE WISELY
Randy Luallin
303-665-4995
301 East St Louisville Colorado 80027
Randy Luallin
301 East st
Louisville Co 80027
303-665-4995
In the recent Public Meeting of the Boulder County Commissioners regarding TDR's (Transfer of Development Rights) and BuildSmart a program mandating certain materials and methods for building new homes many people spoke. The Commissioners were told among other things that the programs were not within the limitations of government given by the constitution, that the name itself was a federally registered name "Buildsmart" and they could not use it, that these programs would create huge obstacles to people not only building their dream home but to speculative builders that build for a living. Not only did the Commissioners not address these issues, they did not even acknowledge them! Proving once again that the public input (limit 3 minutes per person) is a mere formality that Will Toor, Ben Pearlman, and Cindy Dominico (all Democrats) have to suffer through before they can implement their vision and agenda of what is best for us in Boulder County. Under the facade of reducing the "carbon footprint" they sacrifice our rights and liberties to choose for ourselves because they know better. If we cannot get responsible, responsive representation at the county level it is no wonder we don't at the State or National level. It starts here, make your vote count and vote for change, vote Libertarian.
Sierra Club Indian Peaks Group
Questionnaire for Boulder County Commissioner Candidates 2008
If you would like to seek endorsement by the Sierra Club, the following
questionnaire must be completed.
Please return your response to these questions no later than 5:00 p.m. on
June 2. You may email them to HYPERLINK "mailto:davidconley@gmail.com"
nley@gmail.com in either a Word document or a PDF.
1. What are your major environmental achievements as an individual.
I have been a volunteer for many conservation groups including VOC
(Volunteers of Outdoor Colorado), and WRP (Wildlands restoration
volunteers). My most significant and consistent effort has been to the
Colorado Department of Wildlife.
As a hunter along with the other noble hunters, we hunters have helped in
the task of wildlife management on a scale that the Department of Wildlife
cannot perform alone. This necessary ecological management is done at no
expense to the taxpayer; but, instead, by efforts and monetary contributions
of citizens like myself. In fact, the Department of Wildlife is almost
completely funded by the sale of hunting licenses.
I would also like to point out that I have dedicated myself to sustainable
living in harmony with nature. My home is completely off the grid. I
generate my electricity using the sun. I purify my own water and compost my
waste. The all-stone house I have built used local lumber and recycled
fixtures.
2. It has become an informal custom in recent years that Commissioners
specialize in certain aspects of Boulder County operations. Do you see
yourself with a specialty, and, if so, what is it? What environmental
issues related to that specialty might you pursue during your term of
office?
With College training in Natural Resource Management from Colorado State
University, I believe I can contribute to the operations of the Open Space
Department. As a Masonry Contractor in the Building Trades for 25 years I
can be very helpful in the arena of land use and building codes and
inspections.
3. The Sierra Club is concerned about what we regard as an excessive
reliance on chemical pesticides to control nuisance and West Nile-bearing
mosquitoes, noxious weeds, pine bark beetles and real or perceived animal
pests on County lands. Would you support the formation of a new scientific
advisory board, with a balance of agronomic and ecological experts, to
advise the Commissioners, the County Health Department and County Parks and
Open Space on these management issues?
Absolutely! This is of major importance not only to the environment but
also to the health of the citizens within the county. In particular, with
respect to the question of West Nile virus (which I have had) there is
evidence that the chemical application of pesticides has no impact
whatsoever on curtailing it.
4. What can the county do to better protect wildlife? For example would you
support an ordinance regulating trash collection to reduce the number of
"nuisance bears?"
The best use of tax money in this arena would be to educate citizens of the
value and need for better trash disposal techniques and how to perform it.
But this can be done far more effectively and efficiently by non-government
organizations such as the Sierra club!
5. As a County Commissioner how would you support the regional transit
expansion? How could the county improve its local transportation structure
in order to best complement the FasTracks build-out and improve transit
rider-ship? Would you be in favor of a ballot initiative for trails and
transit similar to the one that failed in 2006? How would it differ from
the 2006 initiative?
The Public has voted for the tax regarding the FasTracks and it seems to be
moving forward. In the unincorporated County -- and I hope the affected
municipalities will follow suit -- I would push for an exemption from PUC
restrictions so as to allow the free market to encourage the use of taxi's,
jitney's, and mini-buses; allowing these private vehicles to bring people to
and from mass transit stops. It would also be advantageous to help fund the
project by the sale of land along the route as it becomes more valuable
instead of giving away these windfalls to insiders.
6. How can the Sustainability Program be implemented effectively? Do you
consider the goals realistic? What leadership role do you see for yourself
in increasing energy efficiency? Would you favor the county signing on as a
Sierra "Cool County"? Do we need more funding to provide local incentives,
e.g. lowered permit fees, rebates, low interest loans, to encourage
residential and commercial solar electric, solar thermal and wind as well as
more educational programs for the public? How would these monies be raised,
if needed?
The current BOCC Sustainability program has nothing to do with
Sustainability and has more to do with reducing or stopping development and
building in Boulder County. It is, sadly, a complete misuse of government
to achieve the personal agenda of a few individuals. It not only does not
fit within the perimeter of powers outlined in the constitution but it
tramples on individual and private property rights; which is the very
purpose of government to uphold.
Once again, the people are the ones to decide. It is their choice and I
believe -- with education -- they will make the right choices in what
building materials and how big to build their personal homes. Making
detailed regulations in regard to this is not only shortsighted but can
impede progressive and innovative ideas and solutions from happening.
One of my running mates, Ralph Shnelvar, says: Unnecessary rules force
extraordinary people to do ordinary things.
Government should team up with non-profit associations like the Sierra Club
to educate and inform people of alternatives and encourage the blazing of
new trails. With my own personal journey to off-the-grid sustainability, I
would have been much better served by this kind of public-private education
as opposed to the stringent regulations and guidelines that I had to meet
that, in the end, only increased the cost of building my home.
7. What steps can be taken to strengthen the Super IGA and how does that
impact the boundaries of cities in the county that may annex adjoining land?
The IGA is an agreement entered into by sovereign municipalities. It is a
commendable effort to stop urban sprawl. It is however an agreement that
can be withdrawn by future representatives should the people decide it no
longer serves them well.
The idea of strengthening this agreement might be better reified through
constant dialog and cooperation. We cannot know the future and some
growth -- say linear along mass transit lines -- may be beneficial for
reasons stated before.
There is a definite need for regional planning and open discussion. LAND USE PLANNING AT EVERY LEVEL.IS DOMINATED BY POWERFUL LAND
OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS, THE VERY PEOPLE WE HOPE TO MANAGE. IF INSTEAD WE
DEFINE HARMS AND NEEDED PROTECTIONS BETWEEN NEIGHBORS WHEN THEY DISAGREE,
THE NEEDS OF OLD AND NEW RESIDENTS WILL BE CONTINUALLY FILLED WHEREVER THEY
ARE WANTED -WITH INCREASING IMAGINATION AND LOWER COSTS. THE RESULTS WILL
INCLUDE OPEN SPACE SPACES AND PARKWAYS WITH ROADS AND UTILITIES - ALL
WITHOUT PUBLIC EXPENSE.
8. There is an increasing conflict between using open space tax monies to
manage existing properties and acquiring new properties as availability of
property diminishes and recreational demands grow. Where do you place
yourself on this spectrum of management verses acquisition? Similarly,
there is a conflict between buying lands to preserve prime farm land and
agricultural potential and buying lands chiefly for recreation or wildlife
habitat. Where would you place yourself on that spectrum?
Opens Space now has three taxes and is supported by the people. The
question really is how it should be purchased and administered.
The current zoning of agricultural land is sufficient to maintain the
"rural" flavor that is important to the majority of citizens. Why then
should the people -- at great expense --purchase this land and-take it off
the tax roles where it provides revenue for schools and local fire
departments (which have to fight fires on the very same property) and then
lease it back to the very same farmers for penny's on the dollar to farm as
they always have; at the same time allowing no public access to this
publicly purchased land?
This does not make a lot of sense economically or otherwise. I would much
more favor the purchase of riparian areas and wildlife corridors and
maintain trails and facilities for the public who own it. I would also stop
the use of park personnel as police by carrying firearms. This job is
already allotted to the Sheriffs department, which is already trained and
funded for this purpose.
9. Do you see a role for the County to influence the development (public
transportation access, housing, 'green building') of the Conoco-Phillips
property?
This property is under the jurisdiction of the City of Louisville and I do
not see that changing. Any influence by the County should be suggestive
only.
10. In light of increasing precious metals prices and pressures to reopen
old mines and milling operations, and in light of potential threats to water
supplies posed by (for example) cyanide-based ore milling, would you support
a County ordinance to ban such operations in Boulder County, as Summit
County has done, below?
(3812.04: Open Mining/Use of Cyanide or Other Toxic/Acidic Ore Processing
Reagents. Any mining or milling operation that utilizes cyanide or other
toxic/acidic ore processing reagents in heap or vat leach applications shall
not be allowed in any zoning district.)
Mining has not only been a historical business in this county, you could
actually point to it as the original reason for Boulder County to exist.
I would support the efforts of any entrepreneur to work this trade. As in
any case or situation they must do this without infringing on the rights of
other citizens including exposing them to hazardous material.
11. What is your stance on house sizes in Boulder County?
Given that there are very few build-able lots left within the unincorporated
County, if a private land owner met the setback requirements currently in
place, it is not the business of government or anyone to determine the size
of their house.
I believe we all have a sense of fairness and if we couple that with open
communication, most, if not all, issues of difference of opinions can be
resolved without legislation or litigation that are all costly to the
taxpayer.
From the time of my youth growing up in Boulder, I have been active in
fighting for the health and well being of the environment.
The first time I became involved in environmental issues when I was in high
school and it concerned the damming of the Dolores River.
The perimeters of Government set forth in the Constitution are clear and the
purpose of government to uphold and defend the rights of the individual
against the tyranny of the majority or special interest groups creates a
fine line to be walked. That is why the partnership of government and non
profit groups like the Sierra club to keep the populace informed of
environmental issues is so important. Keep up the good work.
Randy Luallin
301 East St
Louisville Colorado 80027
303-665-4995
Public meeting with the County Commissioners June 12 , by the way, no public testimony allowed. Its just as well the Democratic Board of Commissioners do not listen to the public anyway. Meeting after meeting people testify only as a formality as the Commissioners with little discussion or debate pass the legislation. Even when told it is unconstitutional it does not phase them despite taking an oath to uphold the constitution as the law of the land. One has to wonder if there is collusion involved with the commissioners in violation to the sunshine law. Not even close family members all agree and definitely not on all things without discussion. How then can the Commissioners do so unless they are speaking to each other outside of the public forum. The law has no teeth however and is hard to prosecute unless some brave soul comes forward as a witness that any two Commissioners conversed on public issues outside of an announced public forum. This is not good government. It is time to make some changes. Libertarians are the best choice to bring back fair just and constitutional government back to Boulder County.
WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
This is the statement of the purpose of government and also its limitations. GOOD GOVERNMENT will perform these things and only these things. GOOD REPRESENTATIVES will enact these things and only these things.
The TDR program of buying and selling rights and the build smart program of dictating building systems and materials is not within the confines of the purpose of Government or with the boundaries set forth in the Constitution. You must therefore rescind both programs and replace them with scientifically sound information and suggestions so that citizens can make informed decisions in regard to their property.
A refusal to do so will bring into question your loyalty to the oath of office you have taken to uphold the constitution. Holding your loyalty to your own personal vision or agenda of what Boulder County should be like and foisting this on other citizens by the use of your office is unacceptable.
Can we as a people deal with issues of sustainability, population, pollution, and other problems without giving up our rights and liberties. YES WE CAN!
Randy Luallin
301 East St
Louisville Colorado
sdasdona@juno.com
303-665-4995
Independence weekend thoughts
In a recent city Council meeting I watched as the members stood and recited the pledge of allegiance to the flag and the Republic for which it stands. I am so glad that we live in a constitutional republic and not a Democracy. Few understand the difference. A Republic is governed by its Constitution and the rule of law. It is interesting to note that democracy is never mentioned in the Constitution. A Democracy on the other hand is ruled by the majority with its changing and fickle whims. A Republic is designed to uphold and protect the rights of the individual from the tyranny of the majority. The council sat down and began its session in which a decision was to be made regarding a developers request for a variance of 6 inches, thats right 6 inches on a property line. I was amazed at the barrage of questions he was subjected too, like-- How much money he expected to make--absolutely none of the business of the council. The local neighborhood was there in force obviously the majority. They did not want the vacant lot in question to be developed. They could have easily banded together and purchased the lot in question and then been responsible for the property taxes and the up keep to city Codes but instead they believed they could muscle the council so they could control what they did not own. The only question really before the council was if the granting of the variance would infringe on the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of the neighbors and the city. It did not of course, it was just that the neighbors did not want it. In adjacent Boulder County the rights of individuals in the arena of private property have been violated with impunity. (Private property being one of the main reasons for the revolution that brought forth this great country) Over and over legislation is enacted by the democratic commissioners that it is considered normal and acceptable.
The Constitution is the core of our Republic, it is the law of the land, but few have read it or know what it says. Our current Commander in Chief has said it is just a goddamn piece of paper, but I tell you it is the peoples paper and can only be changed by the people. It is, being a piece of paper unable to fight for itself, the people must fight for it. Every judge, representative, policeman, soldier must swear an oath to uphold and defend it. Our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters mothers and fathers have laid down their lives for this oath. Currently they are dieing by the thousands (over three thousand) in an unconstitutional war. We the people are responsible because we allowed it happen. We allowed it to happen because we elected representatives who have no concern for our document the constitution. The current and recent holders of the Executive Branch of our government both Democrat and Republican have overstepped their constitutional boundaries as the executers of the the will of the people determined by their representatives. They now make policy and lord over the legislative and judicial branch of the government.
From our very local city and county governments to the the federal level the republic is in danger. WE the people can return power back to ourselves by the power of our vote, each person gets the same on election day. Consider voting for the Libertarian candidates determined to uphold the constitution, non violence, social acceptance, personal liberty coupled with personal responsibility. Don't buy into the wasted vote lie. The only wasted vote is the one not cast. If you do not vote for what you want I can guarantee you that you will never get what you want. Let freedom ring.
Thank you for all your support regarding investigation of this Boulder County Land Use Ruling and why Commissioners Pearlman, Toor and Domenico are so ceaselessly hiding it and not answering our straight-forward and simple questions about the circumstances of the ruling that is after all a matter that should be public record.
The Watchdogs believe that the Boulder County Commissioners are involved in a cover-up on this matter because why else would they persistently not answer very simple questions about the ruling - about what happened - about when it happened - about what County staff participated in making the ruling. We've been getting the 'run-around' from the Commissioners for essentially 2 years. There is no paper trail on the ruling - there are no files for the public to research themselves. What we get from the Commissioners and their offices are conflicting responses and stories that change.
Why the secrecy?
The Watchdogs are exasperated by the Commissioners and think that the public should know about this. In fairness, let the public make up their own minds about a cover-up.
So, at your request for a summary from the Watchdogs, we are providing the following for your website:
WHY THE SECRECY AND COVER-UP BY PEARLMAN AND THE OTHER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? - What kind of government do we want?
Background: After 2 years of prodding by Boulder County residents, Boulder County Commissioner Ben Pearlman, and Boulder County Attorney Pat Mayne have advised that in 2006 a sensitive land use ruling was made pertaining to the CEMEX cement plant just east of Lyons. When pressed during the past 12 months by persistent and repeated questioning by community residents about the circumstances of the ruling, all that Pearlman and Mayne and the county will admit is that 1) the land use ruling was made unilaterally by the then Land Use Dept. Director Graham Billingsley in concert with 6 months of legal counsel by more than one County attorney, and that the Commissioners were not advised of the decision, 2) that this land use decision was made verbally, 3) that it was made without a paper trail, 4) made without communication with CEMEX, 5) made without any visit by County Land Use staff to inspect the site of the CEMEX project, 6) made without any building permits being issued at the time of the project's alleged review by the Land Use Dept., and 7) made without any public notice or any public participation or any public oversight even though community residents requested such in writing numerous times.
When asked many times over 12 months for details about the public decision Ben Pearlman, Cindy Domenico, Will Toor, Pat Mayne, and Dale Case have closed their doors and their mouths in secrecy by claiming the matter to be confidential.
Why?
What was done that was so wrong or so ill-conceived or so unethical or so illegal or so foolish that they have to now keep a public ruling and public information secret?
Is there a cover-up being undertaken by the Boulder County Commissioners? You be the judge.
1) When over the course of 12 months The Watchdogs and other community residents repeatedly ask Commissioner Pearlman for details about a public land use decision that he himself asserts was made in 2006 and he repeatedly refuses to answer - well what do you have?
2) When community residents are told by Pearlman and his offices that the land use decision was made verbally, behind closed doors, and with out any paper trail - What do you have?
3) When in 2006 community residents formally requested the Commissioners and the Land Use Dept. - in writing many times - for a public review and hearing on the land use matter, and are told nothing for 2 years and then later are told that the matter was reviewed behind closed doors and without a documentary paper trail - What do you have?
4) When persistent questioning by the community residents is answered by the Commissioners and their offices with conflicting stories that later completely change - What do you have?
5) When community residents ask their Commissioners simple, straight-forward questions such as what County employees participated in this public land use decision, and on what date was this decision made, and where might any written records of this decision be kept, and are stonewalled by the Commissioners for 12 months by their statements that they know nothing about the matter and then later they assert justifiably secrecy because such information is confidential and attorney-client privileged - What do you have?
6) When community residents meet with Pat Mayne, a county attorney, and ask him if he had any communications with Billingsley about the matter, and he replies categorically "no" (that he had not had any communications with Billingsley about the matter), and then later the same community members are informed in writing by Mayne that he and other county attorneys counseled Billingsley for 6 months on the matter - What do you have?
7) When the County Land Use Dept. "Ask A Planner" states in writing that a Special Use Permit (Review) is required for this specific CEMEX proposal, and then the Land Use Dept. rules on the matter behind closed doors, in secrecy, and without a paper trail ...What do you have?
8) Why such a sweat heart deal with industry? The County seems to employ 2 sets of standards - one for dealing with industry that's loosey-goosey, and a 2nd set for dealing with residents that's hard nosed and autocratic. Why were no building permits required by the County in 2006, but yet have been retroactively required in 2008? If Land Use and Mayne had studied the CEMEX proposal in late 2006 over a period of 6 months as Mayne says was done, then why was it not determined in 2006 that a building permit was required.
9) Community members have asked the County Commissioners repeatedly for county rules, regulations and policies pertaining to the making of rulings/decisions/determinations by the Land Use Dept. and community members have asked the Commissioners for rules and regulations and policies pertaining to industrial construction in flood plains. The county persistently has not provided these rules/regulations/policies. Why?
10) Why have community requests for public input ignored by the Commissioners and their offices?
Why does the community receive nothing but have self-serving responses from the Commissioners that they care and that they will be sure matters are handled properly, and then the Commissioners hide what they did?
So ask yourself and your county government: Why are Pearlman and the other Commissioners refusing to answer such simple straight forward questions? What are they hiding about the circumstances of the alleged land use ruling?
Ask yourself and your county government: Why are Pearlman and the other Commissioners sidetracking and diverting the public's inquiry into what was done in secrecy in 2006 with "confidentiality" issues - the confidential stuff pertains only to their investigation of "scope of use position." Confidentiality does in no way apply to the community's simple questions about the circumstances of the land use ruling they allege was made without a paper trail in 2006. The Watchdogs want to know and the public deserves to know what happened in 2006 and who did it.
Ask yourself and your county government: If there is no paper trail and no public record of the alleged 'determination' ruling does it exist and can it be legal? Is it simply a convenient fabrication made by the County? Ask the Commissioners to prove they made the land use ruling.
Randy Luallin
301 East St
Louisville Colorado 80027
303-665-4995
Sneaky move by Boulder Board of Commissioners
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof: or bridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES. Sound familiar, it should, it is the Amendment 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America. As a Senator in the State Assembly Brandon Shaffer sponsored and successfully passed a new State Statute in regards to the County authority to enforce zoning violations. Brandon put forth this legislation at the request of the Boulder County Attorney who drafted it for him. The County Attorney did so with full knowledge if not direction of the County Commissioners. Tucked into this statute was an amendment to another statute in the law. At first glance it was sensible and the amendment part is easily overlooked. In fact so easy that my own representative Paul Weissman told me he did not catch it when he voted for it. The Governor nor any other legislator to my knowledge caught it but it has far reaching implications. The small amendment has to do with removing the right to ask for and receive compensation in the amount of attorneys fees for actions that are FRIVOLOUS, GROUNDLESS, OR VEXATIOUS ACTIONS. as per part 1 of Attorneys fees in the State Statutes when it involves local government, namely County, 13-17-102. In the past Boulder County has been guilty of FRIVOLOUS, GROUNDLESS, OR VEXATIOUS ACTIONS against its citizens in regards to zoning and building disputes. It has cost the taxpayers untold amounts of money to press such actions and then loose in court. It is called redress of grievances as per the constitution. Now however, due to this sneaky little amendment it will cost you win or loose to seek redress. In simple terms yakkety yak don't talk back. When this has been pointed out to Brandon he responds with verb-age about English law, News flash, your in america now, and the framers of this subterfuge knew exactly what they were doing. Brandon feels no need whatsoever to make the effort to correct this error. We cannot afford to have someone of this mentality in the Senate of the United States. How can he or will he protect the rights of States (the purpose of the Senate) if he cannot protect the rights of citizens under the Constitution. If you want change, if you want protection of individual rights you will need to vote for it. Vote Libertarian
A Libertarian Letter to the Sierra Club
Libertarians share many of your environment goals because we believe that none of us should harm others - including future generations and harmful emissions. If we could challenge such crimes before a jury of our peers we would expect to win – unless violators are protected by legislation which is vulnerable to political contributions and lobbying at every level of government. Even valid legislation, when it occurs, can be changed at any time by the efforts of narrow but powerful and well organized interests.
We believe that protections from harm secure the most basic of human rights - our lives, our liberties and the fruits of our labor - our belongings. Their most down-to-earth form is in land and buildings. So the use of property must not harm anyone nearby or far away. We have the right to do as much as existing neighbors have done - or provide more distance, or other buffers. We and they must contain all harmful emissions.
Threats to our lives and liberties from other individuals have been defined for centuries, but land use legislation has blurred or removed many of these definitions for land and buildings. Some benefits have been added but these often favor some landowners at the expense of others without compensation from those who benefit. Such compensation from the general public is now required in Oregon and spreading to other states.
You may share widespread fears that there are no remedies. Yet every time a land use application is reviewed, or requirements are appealed, those who participate can test the regulations involved to see that the new users and their nearby and remote neighbors are all protected. Acceptable proposals and approvals will then provide appropriate separation or other buffers between less compatible uses, and increasing examples to help future projects.
The most likely buffers will add more open space or create landscaped parkways at no cost to the public. Both can connect Boulder County’s existing open spaces to each other. Some can include roads, paved paths, and trails. Adjacent properties must also build and landscape so they and those passing by will benefit each other.
Instead of fighting each other, conflicting users can provide and maintain their kind of trails in new and existing open spaces. Groups such as yours can protect portions for wildlife.
Parkways and open spaces can hide or screen other mutual benefits such as valuable experiments in renewable energies and materials, convenient offices and shops near homes to reduce commuting, much more affordable housing that will make such land far more valuable than a few MacMansions . . .
More taxi’s, jitneys, and mini-buses will create jobs carrying more of us to fixed bus routes and train stations. Both forms of mass transit might become self-funding if they utilize the increased value of land near, above and below their rights-of-way. We will then be protected from noisy and dangerous traffic and trains by structures for storage, parking, restaurants, shops, offices, and housing. Lacey pedestrian walkways at multiple levels can filter sunlight to passengers below while they re-connect neighborhoods on either side.
Unspoiled areas in Boulder County might be preserved by viewing areas and uses which become far more valuable without a handful of visible buildings because they are shared by many users and visitors. You might initiate such areas and use the funds you generate to buy and preserve others.
The Sierra Club could also bid for public lands where public agencies are vulnerable to competing user groups – where neither users or agencies are held responsible for any shortsighted uses, waste, or long run damage they cause. You might outbid fuel and mining companies for vast tracts of land you can manage carefully so their resources and other uses will fund your purchases.
Best of all, Boulder County's example will inspire less affluent communities nationwide to provide such self-funding public transportation, parkways, and open space. This kind of solution will harness all the competing interests that make the current process so agonizing, frustrating, expensive and divisive. Other communities do not have to harm individuals, divide into bitter factions, tax and impose public benefits in the name of community. These benefits and more will occur naturally by restoring protections from harm = justice for all.
Randy Luallin candidate for Boulder County Commissioner Dist 3 301 East St Louisville Colorado 80027 303-665-4995 In a recent public forum Will Toor the Democratic incumbent County Commissioner publicly told me that I need to learn to tell the truth. He was referring to comments I had made regarding the County's litigation with the Rocky Mountain Christian Church I will refer to as RMCC. My comments were that the County had brought lawsuit against a community- based religious organization and, in the approximate two year process for them to receive their building permit in which they have spent almost a million dollars, that not one of their representatives on the Board of Commissioners including Will Toor have set foot on the property or spoken with the leaders of the congregation to resolve this issue. Will Toor corrected me in saying it was RMCC that had brought suit against the County, and Ben Pearlman another Democratic Incumbent spoke up and said he was personally involved with talks with RMCC that "broke down". Telling the truth is very important to me as an individual, and, as a public servant ,transparency and speaking the truth are paramount. So I did some research and I am willing to retract my statements if they are in error. Investigating this, the following truth was manifested: RMCC currently is the plaintiff in a lawsuit against the County regarding this issue, however it was the County that originally threatened and brought suit against RMCC. Recourse for the Church was to bring counter suit which they did. The Counties suit has since been dismissed by a judge as a ploy to get legal leverage thereby leaving only the suit by RMCC in place. RMCC conceded to mediation with the County so this would not go to court. In this Ben Pearlman was the representative of the County, however he refused to meet face to face with RMCC, choosing to have representatives meet in separate rooms with the mediator going back and forth. When it was the County's turn to make a proposal for resolution Ben Pearlman simply walked out. Telling the truth means more than stating factual statements it involves the whole story.
