Impact of Agenda 21
I have written before to the American Journal about the dangers of the U.N.’s Agenda 21.
At that time, I did not know that Westbrook is a pilot site, in the “cross-hairs” of a non-government organization that works to convince communities to accept Agenda 21 plans. The group is Sustain Southern Maine.
I attended their third of three workshops about the Mill Creek District just over the bridge into South Portland. There were only about 15 people there – four onlookers, a property owner, a real estate agent representing Mill Creek property owners, a couple of businessmen and the rest were facilitators working for Sustain Southern Maine, the Greater Portland Council of Governments, or the South Portland Planning Office.
Where were the people who would be affected by these changes? And how many attended the important second workshop during which community opinions were recorded? I asked, and was told by the tech expert that about 30 people showed up.
Yet, according to Sustain Southern Maine, they had the full support of the Mill Creek community to make, among other revisions, Mill Creek a “pedestrian friendly environment” (cars are the bane of sustainable living, as are long commutes, three and four-bedroom houses on large lots, oil heat, etc.).
What really made my ears perk up was their desire to create multi-story housing. I saw the architectural drawings. In the words of my friend who was there with me, “bee-hives.”
People who have been aware of the tactics and methods of Agenda 21 know that this kind of group comes with a pre-determined outcome.
There is a cartoon on this subject with the caption, “Our objective is to get the answers we want and make the citizens think they’re participating in the public process while all the decisions have already been made beforehand!!!”
Did Westbrook’s Planning Board or Charter Commission join ICLEI – the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives? If we are members, the Sustain Southern Maine group will come here to try to convince Westbrook citizens that they know better than we do.
ICLEI directs policies that cause stack ’em and pack ’em surveilled housing, traffic congestion, inaccessible open space, managed control over our lives, mismanagement of water supplies, prohibition on natural resource management that leads to fire hazards and private property restrictions (Understanding Sustainable Development – Agenda 21).
You know the old adage, “There is no free lunch.” In becoming involved with ICLEI and the sustainability crowd, we will lose and lose big, freedom of choice and property rights.
Another apt adage: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t.
Rose Marie Russell
Phase out toxic chemicals
As a grandmother of two beautiful granddaughters, I am very concerned about toxic chemicals in everyday products and I feel like I need to be a chemist to figure out what products are safe for my family. There are so many untested chemicals, and companies often refuse to tell us what is in their products. I am tired of hearing about the bombardment of chemicals that our families are unwillingly and unnecessarily exposed to on a daily basis.
The Maine Legislature is considering a bill that would help get some of these toxic chemicals out of these products. LD 1181, “An Act to Further Protect Pregnant Women and Children from Toxic Chemicals,” would strengthen Maine’s Kids Safe Products Law (KSPA) and ensure that the state continues to identify and phase out toxic chemicals Under KSPA, the Maine DEP has already identified 49 chemicals of high concern proven through strong science to cause serious health problems. These 49 chemicals are found in products sold right here in Maine; however, DEP is not required to take action to remove these chemicals.
LD 1181 would ensure that KSPA continues to work to phase out these toxic chemicals.
I understand that an amendment has been proposed to the bill that would weaken KSPA. I urge Sen. Jim Boyle and the committee to reject the weakening amendment and vote in favor of LD 1181.