Posts Tagged ‘Bellingham Herald’

Is It Mine?

Friday, July 20th, 2012

capture property rights Property Rights, the Environment and Growth Management are a few of the buzz topics in the current election season and as such, the Bellingham Herald apparently chose that angle when they covered the recent Tea Party Candidate Forum.  In that article they contrasted the current State Reps for the 42nd District, Vince Buys & Jason Overstreet with their challengers for office, Natalie McClendon & Matt Krogh.

People do tend to wrap the environment in with growth management, but both are really property rights issues and on property rights there is a stark contrast between these pairs of candidates.   To understand the contrast you need to understand the property rights issue.

The property rights issue isn’t about anyone wanting to damage, pollute or harm the environment.  The property rights issue is simply about you getting to decide what is the best use of your property, as opposed to others deciding how your property will best serve the community.   That’s the crux of the property rights debate; who is in control of your property, you or the government.

At the forum, when the challengers Natalie McClendon & Matt Krogh, addressed government regulatory control of private land it was pretty evident which side of the property rights issue they land on.

“Land use regulations should be imposed or amended in a way that benefits the community.”

“The goal is the public good,”

“He agreed that private property rights should be respected, but he stressed the importance of  protecting the quality of life in Washington state…

Bellingham Herald

I guess I am in stark contrast to their way of thinking also, because my home is not a charitable contribution for the public good of the community, nor did I work to purchase my home with the intent to protect the quality of life in our state.   We just wanted a place to live.   The problem with intangible ideas like public good and quality of life is that they are often defined by public vote, committee or worse, by a non-elected non-governmental organization.  Then, shortly thereafter those definitions are put into regulation and the government enforces their control over your property use.  It’s usually not even in big ways that really jump out at you, it’s more often in small subtle ways.

Take this recent example happening in the streets of Ferndale.  A year ago land owners along some portions of Main Street could have decided to plant a few of their favorite trees in their front yard near the road and they would have had  every right to do so.  This year however, they have found that the city has seized that portion of their property from them, bulldozed it, widened the road, and then landscaped along their much smaller front yard as the city  saw fit.

Ferndale may need to go to court to assert its authority to move forward with the $4.3 million road project as a public benefit, which trumps the right of property owners to keep their land.

Bellingham Herald

I’ve sat through council meetings and I’m sure the city officials feel that what they are doing along Main Street is in the interest of public good, and that the new landscaping contributes to the quality of life for the people of Ferndale, but how is the quality of life for the homeowners who now have bike lanes and sidewalks running through what used to be their front yard?   Is that vision the homeowners had for their property when they purchased it?  Is it their vision now?   Barring any safety issues, how is it that governments like the City of Ferndale feel they have the power to “trump” your property as a property owner?  It’s the people we elect and send to Olympia to make laws.

Do you want representatives such as Natalie McClendon and Matt Krogh that seem to think along the lines of the City of Ferndale?  Do you want representatives that feel that the government has first right to your property?   I don’t.  I won’t be voting for either of these people and I hope, for the sake of all of our private property, that you don’t either.

Both Vincent Buys and Jason Overstreet have my support because they have already shown a commitment to both protecting our individual right to our own property and to protecting our environment.

Rendezvous with Stupidity

Sunday, July 1st, 2012

One of the reasons why I thought it was time to abandon the whole idea of a coal port was because regardless of right or wrong the battle would come at a large financial cost to Whatcom County and Bellingham.   Two recent Herald articles point out one aspect of the lunacy that comes at taxpayer expense.  On one hand we have some pretty powerful reasons why the City’s doesn’t want to waste resources putting the so called “Anti-Coal” initiative on the ballot.

“The initiative proposes  legislation that exceeds the authority of the City of Bellingham,” the suit says. “In its fundamental overriding purpose, the initiative seeks to regulate interstate commerce, the railroads, and the rights of corporations. It also declares local ordinances to be superior to federal law and state law. The City does not have the authority to pass and enforce the measures proposed. … To pass such a law would be directly contrary to state law, the state constitution, federal law, and the United States Constitution.”

via Bellingham files lawsuit to block coal train initiative | Cargo Terminal | The Bellingham Herald.

And on the other hand we have the initiative backers who don’t seem to care if the initiative is “directly contrary to state law, the state constitution, federal law, and the United States Constitution.”

BELLINGHAM – One of the leaders of the anti-coal train initiative campaign says his group will go to court to battle a city lawsuit aimed at keeping the measure off the November ballot.

Stoney Bird, the former corporate attorney named as one of the defendants in the city’s lawsuit, said he is undaunted by the seemingly overwhelming legal barriers to the initiative. As he sees it, the initiative signed by close to 10,000 people that would establish a “Community Bill of Rights” is a valid way for Bellingham citizens to determine their own environmental destiny.

Some say you can’t argue with stupid, but the reality is that the City has to argue with stupid because stupid has a lawyer.  And stupid doesn’t seem to care whether they can win, they are “undaunted by the seemingly overwhelming legal barriers.”  I wonder just how much will this little rendezvous with stupidity will cost us before it is all said and done?

 

Bellingham council seeks court challenge on no-coal-train initiative

Wednesday, June 20th, 2012

Attention Bellingham residents!

Bellingham council seeks court challenge on no-coal-train initiative

BELLINGHAM – After Coal-Free Bellingham initiative backers turned in about 10,000 signatures for a ballot proposal that would outlaw coal trains in the city, the City Council voted to challenge the validity of the measure in court.

via Bellingham council seeks court challenge on no-coal-train initiative | Local News | The Bellingham Herald.

If you are a Bellingham resident you need to give this "Coal-Free Bellingham Initiative" your full attention before signing or supporting it because it is not really about coal.  It is really about using local anti-coal and anti-coal port sentiment to trick you into signing away your rights.

BALLOT TITLE FOR CITY OF BELLINGHAM INITIATIVE No. 2012-2
City of Bellingham Initiative No. 2012-2 concerns the people’s right of self-government. This measure would establish the sovereignty of Bellingham residents, the rights of natural communities, and rights to a sustainable energy future and a healthy climate; prohibit corporations from transporting coal in the City; deny legal personhood and constitutional rights to corporate violators; deny the use of federal and state preemptive law to corporate violators; deny the validity of contrary permits; authorize private party civil enforcement actions; and repeal all inconsistent provisions of existing City ordinances.
“Should this measure be enacted into law?” Yes?______ No?______

Did you find the word “coal” in the initiative?   Go ahead look again if you have to, it is buried right in the middle of a lot of things that are completely separate issues from either coal trains or coal ports.  I’m fairly certain that it is all these separate issues, that make up the bulk of the initiative, which give the City of Bellingham cause to challenge the initiative’s validity.  

I’d like to believe that this initiative will never actually appear on a ballot, but strange things happen in Bellingham. 

Just say no!

Is Rick Perry a threat?

Wednesday, August 17th, 2011

I don’t find him to be threatening, but media attacks immediately following his announcement to run for President would indicate that someone finds him threatening.    And it’s not just media making mountains out of mole hills about what Rick Perry did or didn’t say, the two example I ran across today show that truth is not an obstacle for media attacks on Rick Perry.

The Bellingham Herald/AP story today was headlined “Perry says he doesn’t believe in global warming” yet according to the article he actually didn’t say that he doesn’t believe in global warming.  What Rick Perry actually said is that he does not believe in manmade global warming and that he questions the original idea that manmade global warming is what is causing the climate to change.  There is a fundamental difference between the phrase “global warming” and “manmade global warming” and if you think there isn’t a difference, then you should look into it.  Ignoring the difference is a tool that the left uses to label some people as global warming deniers and thus incompetent.  Luckily there are enough rational thinkers out there to call even AP on this that by this afternoon the article was retitled “Perry expresses doubts on manmade global warming.”

The second example I ran across was from MSNBC.  They purposely edited Rick Perry to again misrepresent what he said.  I’m sure millions of MSNBC viewers won’t ever know they were lied to, but luckily for the rest of us we have media watchdogs out there.

 

and to make things worse, MSNBC actually had Al Sharpton build on this lie with another attack spot on Rick Perry.

Link to original story I view.