+menu-


  • Category Archives Diverting Our Tax Dollars
  • (3) WA Parks -The We’s Who Want?

    (3) WA Parks -The We’s Who Want?

    WA STATE PARK APPROPRIATIONS

    Governor Inslee WANTS the blue ribbon task force on parks and outdoor recreation,

    that he appointed, to  FOCUS ON RECREATION AND TOURISM.

    I did attend the Aug. 19, 2014  committee meeting in Sequim, and I sat SILENTLY through the meeting from 1 P.M. TO 3 P.M. … TO 8 P.M.

    I was allowed, EXACTLY TWO MINUTES, to make my public comment at 7:50 P.M.

    I listened to what your 28 Appointed Committee member’s “WANT” for about seven hours.

    Rep. Tharinger  mentioned, that what you “WANT” to provide funding for recreation/tourism, and what you may actually get, could be significantly different.

    I do investigative, documented reporting on my website behindmyback.org.

    —————————————————————————–

    Below you will find  an exchange of emails

    Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:43 AM

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Farber, Daniel (PARKS)
    To: pearl hewett ; Van De Wege, Rep. Kevin ; Tharinger, Steve ; Hargrove,Jim etc.

    Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:43 AM

    Subject: RE: WHO IS THE “WE” WHO WANTS? STATE PARKS APPROPRIATIONS

    —————————————————————————

    Continue reading, for the full text of my questions, comments and the exchanged emails

    ——————————————————–

    Posted April 21, 2013 Pearl Rains Hewett

    WA STATE PARK APPROPRIATIONS

    PUBLIC ACCESS AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR WA STATE PARKS

    Perhaps YOUR last public hearing opportunity on the topic of our request legislation and the Discover Pass is set for Monday, April 22, 2013 at 9 am before the House $$$$$ Appropriations Committee.

    ———————————————————————————-

    To: Daniel Farber, Director
    Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs
    Washington State Parks

    Daniel,

    I am a WA State Park VESTED Stakeholders
    This my comment on YOUR Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs Washington State Parks and YOUR requested $$$$ legislation.
    ——————————————————————
    Washington Wildlife Recreation Program (WWRP)
    The Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program provides funding for a broad range of land protection and outdoor recreation, including park acquisition and development, habitat conservation, farmland preservation, and construction of outdoor recreation facilities.
    —————————————————————-

    MY COMMENT
    I find the title and description of the , WWRP program DISTURBING? It this WA park broad range of land protection, acquisition, development habitat, conservation program designed to provide outdoor recreation facilities for WILDLIFE?
    ————————————————————–

    Capital Budget (Doesn’t include a possible $5 – $10 million infusion for removal of fish passage blocking culverts)

    Governor Inlsee – $46.6 million (plus $8.3 million in WWRP Grants)
    House – $56.9 million (plus $7.9 million in WWRP Grants)
    Senate – $50.7 million (plus $3.3 million in WWRP Grants)
    Commission October Request – $67.8 million (plus $11.5 million in WWRP Grants)
    ——————————————————————
    Per Rep. VanDeWege, $20 MILLION SPENT for removal of fish passage blocking culverts this year.
    —————————————————————

    MY COMMENT
    Last summer families in Port Angeles were putting up tents and camping in their back yards.

    The abysmal failure of the WA State Discover Pass? The cost, Families simply can’t afford to use WA State Parks.

    ———————————————————–
    *From: an online email comment that was forwarded to me (name removed)

    *Also if there is going to be a gas tax increase, NOVA needs its appropriate share.

    MY COMMENT
    Do you really think raising the gas tax and grabbing a piece of the pie, is the solution to increasing park attendance, for the jobless, working poor, economically starved people in Clallam County?

    MY COMMENT is the solution to providing free Public Viewing of WA State Parks just as a NOVA image on Television?
    ———————————————————————-
    THIS IS WHAT WA State Park VESTED Stakeholders ARE UP AGAINST
    ———————————————————————–
    *From: online email comment that was forwarded to me (name removed)

    *Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 11:58 PM
    To: ‘bchw-public-lands-committee’ ; BCHWLegis@groupspaces.com
    Subject: FW: State Parks Legislative Report – April 19, 2013

    Bills regarding State Parks funding are coming fast and either moving or dying. The session is winding down. I am okay with SB5897 and SHB1935 (scheduled for public hearing on Monday).

    It is hard to state support for SHB1935 since it may be an entirely different bill when it is heard on Monday.

    This is the problem with these bills. They are amended on the spot in Committee with no prior review by the public so you may say you like a bill on minute but it is an entirely different bill the next.

    We still want $27million for State Parks from the General Fund, at least $60 million for WWRP (and no games with cherry picking projects), and no sweeps of NOVA. Also if there is going to be a gas tax increase, NOVA needs its appropriate share.

    Well one bill we supported passed both houses. Increasing the size of the Horse Park Authority. At least it is something!!
    *online email comment name removed
    ———————————————————————–

    *Context : Politics Definition of CHERRY PICKING Added 4/21/13
    Exercising favoritism to benefit yourself or your argument.
    Context : Politics, Social Life
    Category: Metaphor
    Semantic: bias, slant
    Usage of “cherry pick”
    This is not fair. You have cherry picked your winners before the competition started.
    Both the political Left and Right cherry pick data to prove their points. Both sides are showing heavy bias.
    ————————————————————–

    From: Farber, Daniel (PARKS) [mailto:Daniel.Farber@PARKS.WA.GOV]
    Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:50 AM
    To: Farber, Daniel (PARKS)
    Subject: State Parks Legislative Report – April 19, 2013

    Dear Park Stakeholders,

    For your information, below is the latest report to park staff of issues affecting State Parks in the legislature.

    Daniel
    —————————————————–

    From: Farber, Daniel (PARKS)
    Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:45 AM
    To: Parks DL All Employees
    Subject: Legislative Report – April 19, 2013

    Dear Colleagues,

    I want to provide you a brief update on legislative doings since last week’s report.

    A. The Discover Pass and Agency Request Legislation:

    There is no change on the status of SB5897, which combines four major state parks related elements:

    1.The core of our agency request legislation (SB5653) which works to expand partnerships, expand the role of the Park Foundation, and link us more soundly to cultural celebrations, ethnic heritage and the arts.
    2.Discover Pass reforms (SB5289) that formalize existing practice of not requiring/enforcing the Pass when accessing through DNR and WDFW lands. There is no such change on State Parks lands. The bill also allows for wholesaling of the pass, if all three agencies agree.
    3.Establishing a set of performance measurements for state parks, and a reporting function to the legislature.
    4. Provides $5 million per year funding from the litter tax for 4 years to state parks.

    The bill passed the Senate Ways and Means Committee and now sits in the Rules Committee.

    Perhaps the last public hearing opportunity on the topic of our request legislation and the Discover Pass is set for Monday, April 22 at 9 am before the House Appropriations Committee. SHB1935 is set as the first bill up for a public hearing in the House Hearing Room A. At this time we do not know or any amendatory language for that bill. But here is the most reasonable expectation:

    1 It will be similar to SB5897, however it is unlikely to include the litter tax provision.
    2.It may include some provision related to legislative oversight of the potential State Parks-Public Development Authority Co-Management at Fort Worden.
    B.Boating Safety

    SSB 5437 passed the Senate and the House, but in slightly different forms. It is now on the concurrence calendar in the Senate. The bill provides some law enforcement teeth when it comes to operating a boat while under the influence of intoxicating alcohol.

    C. Snowmobile Funding HB2002 has passed the House and now sits in Senate Ways and Means. It would increase fees for snowmobile registration and allow our Commission to set other fees; enabling funding and services to improve to historic levels.

    D. Horse Park Authority A bill to expand the Authority from 7 to 11 members passed both chambers and is scheduled to be signed by the Governor on Monday. Our Commission appoints members to the Authority Board, but has little other relationship to the organization.

    E. Budgets There are no differences to report from last week. The latest versions of the budget proposals are:

    Operating Budget (General Fund or Other Tax Supported Funding)
    Governor Inlsee – $23.7 million
    House – $23.7 million
    Senate – $16.4 million
    Commission October Request – $27.2 million

    Capital Budget (Doesn’t include a possible $5 – $10 million infusion for removal of fish passage blocking culverts)
    Governor Inlsee – $46.6 million (plus $8.3 million in WWRP Grants)
    House – $56.9 million (plus $7.9 million in WWRP Grants)
    Senate – $50.7 million (plus $3.3 million in WWRP Grants)
    Commission October Request – $67.8 million (plus $11.5 million in WWRP Grants)

    I hope you find this report helpful. Please let me know if you have questions or comments.

    Take care,

    Daniel

    Daniel Farber, Director
    Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs
    Washington State Parks
    P.O. Box 42650
    Olympia, Washington 98504-2650
    Tel: (360) 902-8504
    Mobile: (360) 701-5326
    FAX: (360) 586-6580
    E-mail: daniel.farber@parks.wa.gov

    This email and any responses may be subject to state public disclosure laws.
    —————————————————————

    MY COMMENT
    Clallam County Salt Creek Recreation area is a popular FREE ON DEMAND summer refuge for poor working  families.
    Give the WA State parks back to the counties and provide employment for the local people.

    ————————————————————————–
    It would increase fees for snowmobile registration and
    allow our Commission TO SET OTHER FEES

    This entry was posted in Diverting Our Tax Dollars, Public Access to Public Land, WA State Parks,

    —————————————————————————————-

    WA State Park Question?

    Posted on April 21, 2013

    Who is this “WE” who still wants? STATE PARKS APPROPRIATIONS?

    Indeed, I asked a simple question?

    just to be clear, the question remains unanswered?

    ——————————————————
    RESPONSE
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Farber, Daniel (PARKS)
    To: pearl hewett ; Van De Wege, Rep. Kevin ; Tharinger, Steve ; Hargrove,Jim etc.

    Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 10:43 AM

    Subject: RE: WHO IS THE “WE” WHO WANTS? STATE PARKS APPROPRIATIONS

    All,

    My name below is listed from an email headline that I wrote to State Parks staff. But just to be clear, I wrote none of the content of the below email. State Parks is not the “we” referenced by Ms. Hewett.

    Daniel

    Daniel Farber, Director
    Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs
    Washington State Parks
    P.O. Box 42650
    Olympia, Washington 98504-2650
    Tel: (360) 902-8504
    Mobile: (360) 701-5326
    FAX: (360) 586-6580
    E-mail: daniel.farber@parks.wa.gov
    —————————————————————-
    FULL email TEXT INCLUDING QUESTION
    Perhaps YOUR last public hearing opportunity on the topic of our request legislation and the Discover Pass is set for Monday, April 22 at 9 am before the House $$$$$ Appropriations Committee.
    ———————————————————————–

    BELOW, Who is this “WE” who still wants? It is not “WE THE PEOPLE”

    “We” still want $27 million for State Parks from the General Fund, at least $60 million for WWRP (and no games with cherry picking projects), and no sweeps of NOVA. Also if there is going to be a gas tax increase, NOVA needs its appropriate share.

    The same “WE” who wrote
    This is the problem with these bills. They are amended on the spot in Committee with no prior review by the public so you may say you like a bill on minute but it is an entirely different bill the next.

    Set for Monday, April 22, 2013 at 9 am before the House $$$$$ Appropriations Committee.
    ——————————————————–

    From: Farber, Daniel (PARKS)
    Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:45 AM
    To: Parks DL All Employees
    Subject: Legislative Report – April 19, 2013
    Dear Colleagues,

    From: name removed email from the ”WE” who wants.

    Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 11:58 PM
    To: ‘bchw-public-lands-committee’ ; BCHWLegis@groupspaces.com
    Subject: FW: State Parks Legislative Report – April 19, 2013

    Bills regarding State Parks funding are coming fast and either moving or dying. The session is winding down. I am okay with SB5897 and SHB1935 (scheduled for public hearing on Monday). It is hard to state support for SHB1935 since it may be an entirely different bill when it is heard on Monday. This is the problem with these bills. They are amended on the spot in Committee with no prior review by the public so you may say you like a bill on minute but it is an entirely different bill the next.

    We still want $27million for State Parks from the General Fund, at least $60 million for WWRP (and no games with cherry picking projects), and no sweeps of NOVA. Also if there is going to be a gas tax increase, NOVA needs its appropriate share.

    Well one bill we supported passed both houses. Increasing the size of the Horse Park Authority. At least it is something!!

    name removed email from the ”WE” who wants.
    ———————————————————————–

    FOR CLARIFICATION
    Context : Politics Definition of CHERRY PICKING Added 4/21/13
    Exercising favoritism to benefit yourself or your argument.
    Context : Politics, Social Life
    Category: Metaphor
    Semantic: bias, slant
    Usage of “cherry pick”
    This is not fair. You have cherry picked your winners before the competition started.
    Both the political Left and Right cherry pick data to prove their points. Both sides are showing heavy bias
    ———————————————————————–

    This entry was posted in Reasonable Man understanding, Public Access to Public Land, WA State Parks

    ———————————————————

    If you bothered to read this far, I have a few closing comments.

    I listened to you, you gave me TWO MINUTES.

    Round and round and round the table, I listened to you , most members? FOCUSED on what they “WANT “. And, what you wanted was MORE TAXPAYER MONEY! for what YOU “WANT”.

    It took a comment from a WA Parks, Whidbey Islander before the word “AFFORDABLE”  RECREATION was mentioned.

    A question to the WA Parks Fort Wardener, how much does it cost? total?

    The answer? We don’t keep track of it?

    FOLLOW THE MONEY?  We don’t keep track of it?

    Rep. Tharanger’s response… basically was, some from here, some from a grant there, more here, more from matching funds there.

    Rep. Tharanger’s response and I quote “Part of the Game”.

    Really? Following Taxpayer money? keeping track of the total amounts? grants? matching funds?

    THE TAXPAYER’S $$$$ MONEY’S IS ALL GONE FOR WA STATE PARKS? RECREATION? TOURISM? AND THE MILLIONS OF $$$ FOR THE BACKLOG OF MAINTAINACE? AND REPAIRS?

    “Part of the Game?” As a vested WA State taxpayer, perhaps someone in Olympia, could forward a copy of the WA State legislated rules for this WA Parks taxpayer money Game?

    ————————————————————————————————————

    Please visit my website for the

    The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

    A highly convoluted “GAME OF RESTORATION” that  is involving the sleight of many, many hands, in which hundreds of  inverted Federal agencies, WA State agencies, WAC’S and /or other NGO, NUTSHELLS are moved about, and hard working taxpayers must attempt to spot which is the one, of many thousands, with  NGO’S or other government agencies are underneath the “RESTORATION” plan.

    WOW!  HOW MANY NUTS CAN YOU GET UNDER ONE RESTORATION SHELL?

    “WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE MORE THAN 600 PARTNERS TOGETHER, designing a unified plan, and making sure money is being spent efficiently, and our region is making progress,” SAYS GERRY O’KEEFE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP.

    To be continues….

     

     

     


  • SMP Update-Six Years of Frustration

    SMP UPDATE – SIX YEARS OF FRUSTRATION

    I submit this as a Clallam County SMP Update Public Comment

    August 18, 2014

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Member of the Clallam County SMP Update Committee

     

    Jul 20, 2013 THE BELLEVUE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS BEEN WORKING ON SHORELINE ISSUES FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS.

    FROM Aug 23, 2008  TO Aug. 2014 – SIX YEARS

    This is a applicable, cautionary, documented historical  summary and it is,  my PUBLIC Clallam County SMP COMMENT on the pitfalls and frustration that ONE WA State  city council  and PLANNING COMMISSION has been experiencing for OVER 6 YEARS in attempting to update their DOE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PLAN.

    ————————————————————————————-

    THE BOTTOM LINE AFTER SIX YEARS OF SMP UPDATE FRUSTRATION

    WHETHER ALL OF THE EFFORT BEING PUT INTO THE PLAN WILL SATISFY HOW THE DOE DEFINES “NO NET LOSS” MAY ONLY BE KNOWN ONCE THE SHORELINE MASTER PLAN IS SUBMITTED.

    ————————————————————————–

    documented history

    ECOLOGY CONDUCTED AN INFORMAL REVIEW AND SENT A LETTER TO THE CITY CONTAINING COMMENTS ON THE COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS.

    Jul 20, 2013 THE BELLEVUE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS BEEN WORKING ON SHORELINE ISSUES FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS.

    Jul 16, 2014 BELLEVUE Shoreline plan set for August 2014  public hearing

    The purpose of the August 4, 2014 PUBLIC

    HEARING is to provide an opportunity to make written and oral comments regarding Council-requested variations that are being considered to the Planning Commission’s draft Shoreline Master Program.

    —————————————————————–

    Please continue reading for the documented history

    ———————————————————————————-

     

    THE BOTTOM LINE AFTER SIX YEARS OF SMP UPDATE FRUSTRATION

    WHETHER ALL OF THE EFFORT BEING PUT INTO THE PLAN WILL SATISFY HOW THE DOE DEFINES “NO NET LOSS” MAY ONLY BE KNOWN ONCE THE SHORELINE MASTER PLAN IS SUBMITTED.

    According to Richard Settle, an attorney specializing in environmental and land use law with foster pepper PLLC, “NO NET LOSS” IS A NEW AND AMBIGUOUS CONCEPT FOR WASHINGTON.

    —————————————————————————————————————————

    WHO IS ATTORNEY RICHARD SETTLE ? (I have added this information)

    - See more at: http://www.foster.com/profile.aspx?id=97#sthash.Vh8jPovg.dpuf

    Richard L. Settle

    According to Richard Settle, an attorney specializing in environmental and land use law with foster pepper PLLC, “NO NET LOSS” IS A NEW AND AMBIGUOUS CONCEPT FOR WASHINGTON.

    While the DOE requires NO NET LOSS of existing ecological functions, Settle said that implies a tradeoff of development and restoration. He said there’s also an assumption that restoration doesn’t have to be immediate, and could take as long as 20 years depending on the development.

    He added there’s also confusion as to how far back in time restoration is supposed to match up with shoreline conditions.

    —————————————————————————————

    Dick has more than 40 years of experience assisting clients with matters related to land use, the environment, and municipal law. His experience includes the representation of landowners, developers, municipalities, and citizen groups in virtually all areas of state and local land use regulation before state and local agencies and trial and appellate courts.

    Dick was also recently singled out by the highly-regarded Chambers USA legal directory, which annually interviews firm clients. In addition to a top-ranking of Foster Pepper’s Land Use group, Chambers described Dick as “the leading scholar in land use” and noted for his “vast experience in land use laws and regulations.”

    - See more at: http://www.foster.com/profile.aspx?id=97#sthash.Vh8jPovg.dpuf

    —————————————————————————————————————–

    The purpose of the August 4, 2014 PUBLIC

    HEARING is to provide an opportunity to make written and oral comments regarding Council-requested variations that are being considered to the Planning Commission’s draft Shoreline Master Program.

     

    The Planning Commission SMP Update recommendation was the subject of

    a prior public hearing that was held on May 5, 2014.

     

    During the July 14, 2014  Study Session, staff presented additional information requested by the Council during the course of its in-depth review. This additional information was Council to identify variations to the  Planning Commission Recommendation that they wished to be considered during the second Public Hearing, and prior to development of the Final SMP Update package for submittal to the Department of Ecology. Variations requested by the Council for consideration by the public are described below.

     

    1.Public Access

    The Council-requested variation to the Planning Commission

    recommendation would require public access (either physical or visual) to be provided as a component of new or expanded private recreation uses (such as yacht clubs, marinas and community clubs). This variation would build on the Planning Commission recommended requirement to provide public access to public uses (including parks, and transportation and utility infrastructure). A description of the Public Access variation under consideration by the City Council is included in

     

    Attachment A.

    2.Park Development.

    The Council- requested variation to the Planning Commission

    recommendation would permit all beach parks to be developed through an administrative permit approval process when a Master Plan had been previously adopted by the City Council.

    Under this variation, Meydenbauer Bay Park would be

    permitted in the same manner as other parks with Master Plans. A

    description of the Park Development variation under consideration by the City Council is presented in

     

    Attachment B.

    3.

    Determination of Ordinary High Water Mark.

    The Council-requested variation to the Planning Commission recommendation would allow for the measurement of setbacks from a fixed elevation as a default, with the ability for applicants to obtain a site-specific determination if desired.

    The fixed elevation would be

    3 based on a lake study such as the one conducted for Lake Sammamish in 2004. This variation would also include  clarification that the fixed elevations would not be used for the purpose of establishing shoreline jurisdiction or determining the

    location of ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for the purpose of properly locating a new dock or bulkhead. A description of the variation under consideration by the City Council for Determination of OHWM is presented in.

     

    Attachment C.

    4.Setbacksand Vegetation Conservation. The Council-requested variation to the Planning Commission setback

    recommendation would include a 50-foot  structure setback with the flexibility to reduce the setback and move toward the water through a series of menu options(or incentives). Existing structures on the site receive the benefit of a footprint exception to legally retain setbacks established by existing residential structures. A string test, allowing for setbacks to be reduced based on the location of structures on abutting properties, would also be included. Mitigation for potential loss of vegetation and vegetation retention would also be required. A description of the Setback and Vegetation Conservation variation under consideration by the City Council is presented in Attachment D.

     

    5.Residential Moorage.

    The Council-requested variation to the Planning Commission residential moorage recommendation would increase the allowed moorage walkway width from four feet to five feet in the first 30 feet waterward of OHWM. Variations to the balance of the Planning Commission recommendation on this topic were not considered.

     

    City Council

    The City Council has held study sessions to consider the Planning Commission’s draft Shoreline Master Program. Refer to the links below for council agenda materials and minutes on the topic.

    Planning Commission

    Residents and other stakeholders had multiple opportunities to provide feedback on the shoreline management update through Bellevue’s Planning Commission, residents who served as an advisory panel for the City Council.  The Planning Commission reviewed work products, provided input and guidance related to the development of goals, policies and regulations, and served as a preliminary approval board. Agendas for Planning Commission meetings in which the shoreline management update was addressed are available below.

    Response to Questions by the Washington Sensible Shoreline Alliance

    Responses to questions & requests collected between May & December of 2009

     

    ——————————————————————————-

    In 2003 the state revised its shoreline management guidelines to emphasize ecologically appropriate development and to reinforce the other goals of the act.

    by 2010. As a consequence, Bellevue has to update its shoreline regulations by 2010.

    Bellevue has been Updating their  SMP plan since 2008

    Aug 23, 2008  Boat tour to focus on shoreline issues The boat will sail promptly from Newport Shores Yacht Club (81 Skagit Key) at 1 p.m. on

    Saturday, Sept. 20, 2008,  with boarding beginning at 12:30. Members of the Bellevue City Council, city boards and commissions and staff from permitting agencies and local Indian tribes are also expected to attend.

    The three-hour tour is open to the public, but space is limited. (To inquire about the tour or to RSVP, please call 425-452-4392 or e-mail sltaylor@bellevuewa.gov.)

    —————————————————————————————

    Jul 20, 2013  

    BELLEVUE SHORELINE PLAN ADVANCES

    Jul 20, 2013  The Bellevue City Council agreed on a two-prong strategy for updating the city’s Shoreline Master Program, and, ultimately, forwarding the plan to the state Department of Ecology for final review and approval.

    The shoreline plan is required by state law and provides a regulatory framework for managing shorelines in Washington. Local plans must be consistent with Ecology guidelines.

    THE BELLEVUE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS BEEN WORKING ON SHORELINE ISSUES FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS.

    In May, the commission recommended that the council consider several components of the plan update that had been completed and posted online for review.

    ECOLOGY CONDUCTED AN INFORMAL REVIEW AND SENT A LETTER TO THE CITY CONTAINING COMMENTS ON THE COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS.

    On Monday, the council directed city staff to work with Ecology on the content of the commission’s recommendations and possibly narrow the range of issues that need to be resolved. COUNCIL MEMBERS ALSO DIRECTED STAFF TO BEGIN WORK TO FINALIZE THE REMAINING ELEMENTS OF THE SHORELINE PLAN UPDATE PRIOR TO FORMALLY SUBMITTING IT TO ECOLOGY. The council plans to review and discuss the plan update during a study session later this year.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    Mar 13, 2014

    COUNCIL TO DIGEST SHORELINE PLAN

    Mar 13, 2014 Bellevue city council members emphasized the importance of a strong public process Monday

    as they move through a series of presentations on the planning commission’s update to shoreline management regulations over the next four months.

    WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTING ITS UPDATED REGULATIONS AND RESTORATION PLAN,

    The council now will be briefed on the contents of the SMP over the next four months,

    with a review of recommended policies for shoreline overlay set for April 14, 2014

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Apr 30, 2014

    Council has more questions about shoreline plan

    —————————————————————————————

    Apr 30, 2014 Bellevue council members had more questions than answers by the end of Monday’s third round of informational sessions provided by staff about the progress of creating a shoreline master plan the city hopes will pass state muster.

    The City Council was updated Monday on the cumulative impact analysis and HOW BELLEVUE’S PLAN WILL ATTEMPT TO SATISFY A REQUIREMENT THAT NO NET LOSS OF ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS occur during future development and redevelopment along the city’s jurisdictional shorelines. THIS CAME AHEAD OF A MAY 5 PUBLIC HEARING for the city’s shoreline master plan, which will eventually go to the Washington Department of Ecology for final approval.

    Sarah Sandstrom, fisheries biologist for the Watershed Company, told council members “NO NET LOSS” goes further than just ecological functions of a shoreline, and includes also preserving shoreline views for residents and assessing the amount of reasonable development that could occur in the next 20 years along Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish.

    With a majority of Bellevue’s shorelines already developed, Sandstrom said residential redevelopment will likely be the most common occurrence and some new single-family development.

    The plan involves taking a qualitative look at the issue of NET LOSS, she said, as it’s hard to quantify restoration when a dock, for example, requires a certain amount of native vegetation to offset its impact as part of an “ECOLOGICAL TRADEOFF.”

    “Shoreline residential development falls under an exemption,” said Sandstrom of the no net loss requirement. “So, individual demonstration of no net loss is not required for shoreline residential development or for most permits that are issued as shoreline substantial development permits.”

    That does not mean the city will not need to ensure there is no net loss of ecological function, she told council, but that it will not need to be proven independently by the permit applicant. The project would be checked against current regulations that should result in no net loss.

    Bulkheads — vertical concrete barriers along shorelines — will not be allowed to be replaced under the shoreline plan, which instead favors a rocky slope. Bulkheads, said Sandstrom, negatively affects wave reflection. Bulkheads would need to be determined the only feasible option to be used.

    Sandstrom said another concern is that the plan proposes residential setbacks of 25 feet, which is less than the existing median setback of 50 feet for Lake Sammamish and Lake Washington.

    “The potential for houses moving closer to the shoreline has potential impacts in terms of water quality, moving pollutant generating surfaces closer to the shoreline,” she said.

    Should redevelopment of properties occur using a 25-foot setback, Sandstrom said there is also the potential of obstructing the views from other properties than are 50 feet from the shoreline.

    One option proposed to prevent this is a common line or streamline setback, which would require a new or redeveloped property to use the average setback of the two properties adjacent to it.

    Whether all of the effort being put into the plan will satisfy how the DOE defines “NO NET LOSS” may only be known once the shoreline master plan is submitted. According to Richard Settle, an attorney specializing in environmental and land use law with foster pepper PLLC, “NO NET LOSS” IS A NEW AND AMBIGUOUS CONCEPT FOR WASHINGTON.

    ——————————————————————————-

    (I have added this information)

    - See more at: http://www.foster.com/profile.aspx?id=97#sthash.Vh8jPovg.dpuf

    Richard L. Settle

    According to Richard Settle, an attorney specializing in environmental and land use law with foster pepper PLLC, “NO NET LOSS” IS A NEW AND AMBIGUOUS CONCEPT FOR WASHINGTON.

    —————————————————————————————

    Dick has more than 40 years of experience assisting clients with matters related to land use, the environment, and municipal law. His experience includes the representation of landowners, developers, municipalities, and citizen groups in virtually all areas of state and local land use regulation before state and local agencies and trial and appellate courts.

    Dick was also recently singled out by the highly-regarded Chambers USA legal directory, which annually interviews firm clients. In addition to a top-ranking of Foster Pepper’s Land Use group, Chambers described Dick as “the leading scholar in land use” and noted for his “vast experience in land use laws and regulations.”

    - See more at: http://www.foster.com/profile.aspx?id=97#sthash.Vh8jPovg.dpuf

    ————————————————————————————————–

     

    While the DOE requires NO NET LOSS of existing ecological functions, Settle said that implies a tradeoff of development and restoration. He said there’s also an assumption that restoration doesn’t have to be immediate, and could take as long as 20 years depending on the development.

    He added there’s also confusion as to how far back in time restoration is supposed to match up with shoreline conditions.

    “It’s definitely not pre-European discovery,” he said.

    Councilmember Kevin Wallace expressed his irritation that the council has been briefed three times on shoreline master plan development, however, confusion about meeting DOE standards remains. He added there also needs to be more done to address private property rights in the plan.

    “That is not helpful in deciding how to regulate someone’s private property, whether there is a net loss of ecological functions,” he said. “So, I just want to lodge my personal frustration. I’m just stunned that every jurisdiction in the state has to go through this and do this and in 2014 the state of the law on this is so unclear. … What we’re basically looking at is someone’s opinion,” he said.

     ————————————————————————————————-

    Jul 16, 2014

    Shoreline plan set for August public hearing

    Jul 16, 2014 at 3:10PM Bellevue Mayor Claudia Balducci made it clear to City Council on Monday they had precious little time left to approve options for a draft shoreline management plan AHEAD OF AN AUGUST PUBLIC HEARING.

    COUNCIL MEMBERS PASSED IT BACK TO STAFF, CONFIDENT PUBLIC OPINION WILL CHANGE IT AGAIN.

    Public access

    The council passed forward direction to have the SMP expand public access to commercial shoreline properties that expand more than 20 percent, such as marinas and yacht clubs. 

    LAND USE DIRECTOR CAROL HELLAND TOLD COUNCIL MEMBERS — CAUTIOUS OF VIOLATING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS — access can be limited if security risks are present, and may also only apply to visual access in some cases.

    Siding with yacht clubs and marinas, Councilmember Jennifer Robertson pointed out they do offer public access — as long as people pay for it.

    Park development options

    Council members have heard public comment asking them to side with the city’s planning commission’s recommendation that Meydenbauer Beach Park — slated to be Bellevue’s most expensive park redeveloped at more than $40 million — REQUIRE a conditional use permit ahead of construction. The Meydenbauer Bay Neighborhood Association argues it would require a public hearing and allow residents to be more involved in its development.

    The City Council decided since a master plan exists for Meydenbauer Bay Park, future construction would be dealt with through administrative permitting and does not require a CUP.

    High water mark

    Robertson told council members they were making the wrong decision when they voted to set the high-water mark at a static elevation using the Bellevue Lake Study, which sets it at 31.8 feet, but allows for individualized assessment.

    She said she spoke to a scientist who told her the study was flawed, using two standard deviations. Councilmember John Chelminiak said the state Department of Ecology will make the ultimate decision on the SMP, and the council can choose differently, but the plan may not be accepted.

    “It is the latest study that has been done, and it is consistent, at least with what Sammamish set,” Chelminiak said.”I’m ready to vote,”

    ROBERTSON SAID. “I’M GOING TO BE AN EMPHATIC ‘NO’ “

    Setbacks, buffers and vegetation conservation

    Council members passed through an option to allow flexible setbacks of 50 feet, which property owners can buy down to 25 feet if they follow a string test and provide adequate vegetation conservation using set menu options.

    Balducci said the planning commission recommendation for 50-foot setbacks with greenscape options would result in net loss of native vegetation, and that replacing it with lawns is not what SMP regulations should encourage.

    Robertson said the commission’s option should be considered, but require greenscape only be allowed for two-thirds of the area required for vegetative conservation. She said string tests and menu options requiring unsightly native vegetation goes too far.

    Council members agreed to move forward with the 50-foot setbacks, string test and menu options, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING PUBLIC COMMENT WILL MODIFY THOSE OPTIONS to lessen vegetation requirements and allow greenscape where appropriate.

    “I would agree, this goes overboard,” Chelminiak said.

    A draft of the SMP will be developed by city staff ahead of an Aug. 4 public hearing, after which the council WILL DIRECT STAFF AGAIN on Sept. 8, 2014 on what regulations should be submitted to the DOE for review.

     

    • BRANDON MACZ,  Bellevue Reporter Staff Writer 

     

    Mar 13, 2014 Bellevue city council members emphasized the importance of a strong public process Monday

    as they move through a series of presentations on the planning commission’s update to shoreline management regulations over the next four months.

     Mar 13, 2014  WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTING ITS UPDATED REGULATIONS AND RESTORATION PLAN,

    The council now will be briefed on the contents of the SMP over the next four months,

    with a review of recommended policies for shoreline overlay set for April 14, 2014

    and review of the cumulative impact analysis and light rail component on April 28 2014 .

    —————————————————————————————

     

    April 30, 2014 Updating the SMP plan — mainly unchanged since 1974 — also has been an

    AN AREA OF FOCUS BY THE BELLEVUE PLANNING COMMISSION

    FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS,

     a process that was slated for completion in 2011. (2010?)

    April 30, 2014 Monday’s City Council study session laid out the progress of the planning commission,

     including fixes to a number of COMPLIANCY ISSUES within the SMP’s May 2013 draft FOLLOWING AN UNSOLICITED REVIEW BY the (DOE) Washington Department of Ecology, which has final say on approving the program.

    THE BOTTOM LINE AFTER SIX YEARS OF SMP UPDATE FRUSTRATION

    WHETHER ALL OF THE EFFORT BEING PUT INTO THE PLAN WILL SATISFY HOW THE DOE DEFINES “NO NET LOSS” MAY ONLY BE KNOWN ONCE THE SHORELINE MASTER PLAN IS SUBMITTED.

    The Clallam County SMP Update will have a significantly LARGER NEGATIVE impact on the economic development of  private property on the shorelines statewide significance rivers, lakes and streams IN OUR UNDEVELOPED COUNTY.

    Related Stories

     

     

     


  • FAIR? Illegal’s Taking U.S. Jobs and $$$

    FAIR? Illegal’s Taking U.S. Jobs and $$$

    Who knew there is a  (FAIR) FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM keeping track of  The fiscal burden of illegal immigration on United States Taxpayers

     AND  THE  

    ILLEGALS TAKING U.S. JOBS

    http://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-aliens-taking-u-s-jobs

    ————————————————

    THE FISCAL BURDEN OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ON UNITED STATES TAXPAYERS

    http://www.fairus.org/issues/publications/state-cost-studies

    ———————————————————————————-

    WHERE ARE THE JOBS TAKEN BY ILLEGAL ALIENS LOCATED?

     Updated March 2013

    Below is a listing of the estimated number of jobs encumbered by illegal alien workers by state (and Washington, DC). THE ESTIMATE IS PROPORTIONAL TO FAIR’S ESTIMATE OF THE ILLEGAL ALIEN POPULATION RESIDING IN EACH STATE. The listing does not include an estimate for those states that have estimated illegal alien populations of 5,000 or fewer (Maine, Montana, North and South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming).

    State Jobs Taken
    Alabama 89,550
    Alaska 7,165
    Arizona 279,395
    Arkansas 39,400
    California 1,887,695
    Colorado 139,700
    Connecticut 85,965
    DC 25,075
    Delaware 21,490
    Florida 587,440
    Georgia 322,375
    Hawaii 21,490
    Idaho 21,490
    Illinois 394,015
    Indiana 85,965
    Iowa 46,565
    Kansas 50,145
    Kentucky 35,820
    Louisiana 42,985
    Maryland 211,335
    Massachusetts 136,115
    Michigan 82,385
    Minnesota 71,640
    Mississippi 21,490
    Missouri 42,985
    Nebraska 28,655
    Nevada 143,280
    New Hampshire 10,745
    New Jersey 293,720
    New Mexico 71,640
    New York 537,295
    North Carolina 293,720
    Ohio 78,805
    Oklahoma 60,895
    Oregon 121,785
    Pennsylvania 128,950
    Rhode Island 25,075
    South Carolina 50,145
    Tennessee 85,965
    Texas 1,296,670
    Utah 71,640
    Virginia 186,260
    Washington 197,010
    Wisconsin 68,055

     Updated March 2013

    —————————————————————————————————–

    FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM (FAIR)

    THE FISCAL BURDEN OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ON. UNITED STATES TAXPAYERS by Jack Martin, director of special projects and Eric A. Ruark, director of research.

    http://www.fairus.org/issues/publications/state-cost-studies

    ——————————————————————————————-

    WASHINGTON STATE estimated 275,000 illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children cost state’s taxpayers about $2.7 billion per year. That cost results from regular K-12 public schooling plus supplemental English instruction, medical services, policing, courts and incarceration as well as some welfare programs for the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. The fiscal burden on Washingtonians has been growing as the size of the illegal alien population has grown. The fiscal burden translates into an annual fiscal burden of about $970 for each household headed by a U.S. citizen.

    ——————————————————————————

    CALIFORNIA’S FISCAL BURDEN HAS DOUBLED IN 10 YEARS 2004-2014

    2014 CALIFORNIANS bear an enormous fiscal burden as a result of an illegal alien population estimated at almost 3 million residents. The annual expenditure of state and local tax dollars on services for that population is $25.3 BILLION. That total amounts to a yearly burden of about

    2014   $2,370 FOR A HOUSEHOLD HEADED BY A U.S. CITIZEN.

    2004 Current Census Bureau data indicate that California’s illegal immigrant population is costing the state’s taxpayers more than $10 BILLION PER YEAR IN 2004. This analysis looks specifically at the costs of education, medical care and incarceration, which are the major cost categories. Even without accounting for all of the other areas in which costs are being incurred by California’s taxpayers, this study indicates that the burden is substantial –

    2004 NEARLY $1,200 PER NATIVE-HEADED HOUSEHOLD — AND THAT THE COSTS ARE RAPIDLY INCREASING.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    2012The fiscal burden on OREGON’S taxpayers resulting from an estimated 170,000 illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children cost state’s taxpayers an estimated $1 billion per year. That fiscal cost results from regular K-12 public schooling plus supplemental English instruction, medical services, policing, courts and incarceration as well as some welfare programs for the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. That fiscal burden has been growing as the size of the illegal alien population has grown. The annual outlay amounts to about $730 for each household headed by a U.S. citizen.

    ————————————————————————————–

    In 2013, illegal immigration cost TEXAS TAXPAYERS ABOUT $12.1 BILLION ANNUALLY. That amounts to more than $1,197 for every Texas household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at $1.27 billion per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, but we include an estimate of revenue from sales taxes, property taxes, alcohol taxes, and cigarette taxes.

    ———————————————————————————————————–

    NEW MEXICANS bear a fiscal burden of about $717 million per year in outlays due to an estimated 100,000 illegal alien residents and their U.S.-born children. Those outlays are in large part due to the education of an estimated 6,700 illegal alien students and an additional 30,170 U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. Their K-12 cost is about $438 million, and an additional $54 million is spent on their separate English instruction. Other costs relate to medical services, policing, courts and incarceration as well as some welfare programs for the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. That fiscal burden has been growing as the size of the illegal alien population has grown. The annual outlay amounts to about $1,000 per household headed by a U.S. citizen.

    ————————————————————————————————–

    2014 Illegal immigration cost NORTH CAROLINA taxpayers more than $2 billion annually. That amounts to $578 annually for every North Carolina household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at less than $300 million per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, and are not a true offset in any case. The burden on the state’s taxpayers would not be alleviated by adoption of an amnesty, but could be compounded if it attracted a new surge of illegal immigration as did the amnesty in 1986.

    —————————————————————————————————————————-

    2010 Illegal immigration costs federal and local taxpayers $113 billion a year. That is an average cost to native-headed households of $1,117 a year. This pioneering study brings together data and estimates of the fiscal cost resulting from federal, state and local expenditures on illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children. Separate estimates are available for each state. Copies by mail are $25.

    READ MORE AT: http://www.fairus.org/issues/publications/state-cost-studies

     


  • (2) Why I Won’t Vote for Liberals?

    Why I won’t Vote for Liberals?

    I don’t like The State of the Liberal Union.

    DO YOU?

    Rich man -Poor man – Beggar man – Thief – Doctor- Lawyer – Indian Chief.

    That pretty much sums it up.

    —————————————–

    WHILE  the WORKING UPPER  AND MIDDLE CLASS AMERICAN’S   ARE BEING TAXED  INTO POVERTY, for the common good?

    A leftist government steals money from HARD WORKING AMERICAN CITIZENS  and gives it to others, FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF? UNDOCUMENTED ILLEGAL  ALIENS? The current population may range from 7 MILLION TO 20 MILLION  IMMIGRANTS  that are living in the United States ILLEGALLY.

    ———————————————————————————-

    President Obama said “WE MUST GET THE “WORKERS”  BACK TO WORK

    A Freudian slip?

    The SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY (SWP) is a far-left political organization in the United States.

    OBAMA DID NOT SAY “WE MUST GET THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BACK TO WORK.

    Obama said “WE MUST GET THE WORKERS BACK TO WORK”

    WOW, THE “SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY” traces its origins back to the former Communist ….

    SOCIALISM is a governmental philosophy which calls for the redistribution of American wealth

    Really? the redistribution of wealth for “WHO’S”  common good.

    Not to just redistributed AMERICAN WEALTH TO POOR American citizens,

    BUT for THE DHS SUPPORT AND  REDISTRIBUTION OF AMERICAN WEALTH

    TO AND FOR  UP TO 7 MILLION TO 20 MILLION  ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

    ———————————————————————————————————

    WHILE  the WORKING UPPER  AND MIDDLE CLASS AMERICAN’S   ARE BEING TAXED  INTO POVERTY, for the common good?

    The RICH MEN AND WOMEN leaders, THE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES  of the American leftist government are living  high on the hog.

    Rich man -POOR WORKING  MAN – Poor Man – Beggar man – Thief – Doctor- Lawyer – Indian Chief.

    YOU SHOULDN’T BE WORRIED?

     Unless, of course, YOU DON’T LIKE SOCIALISM?

    And, you are not  particularly impressed with an American PRESIDENT AND FEDERAL left wing government THAT is  turning our SOVEREIGN FREE COUNTRY INTO A TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP.

    What happens to America, when? Nothing is  politically neutral, and nothing is  outside the scope (or control) of the state?

    When the LIBERAL LEFT WING totalitarian state uses modern means to exercise complete political power?

    What happens when? The state takes over and tries to control the economic, social, intellectual and cultural aspects of people’s lives?

    The word “totalitarian” is defined: “of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures”. 

    We used to call ourselves “THE LAND OF THE FREE”, but the truth is that we are being transformed into a TOTALITARIAN society.

    And LIBERAL left wing  TOTALITARIANISM GOVERNMENT  is exactly what we are experiencing  in America today.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    CONTROLLED BY THE (NGO) GRANTED?

    HOW MANY NON-ELECTED? NON- GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS? (NGO) ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS ARE IN COLLUSION WITH EACH OTHER AND BEING BANKROLLED BY THE LIBERAL US GOVERNMENT.

    DO YOU KNOW WHAT A MANIPULATED BALDING IS?

    DO YOU KNOW WHAT (NGO) SUE AND SETTLE IS?

    DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY ENDANGERED SPECIES THERE ARE?

    DO YOU KNOW WHAT AN EPA UNFUNDED MANDATE IS?

    ———————————————————————————

    DO YOU KNOW THE DEFINITION OF COLLUSION?

    Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage.

    —————————————————————————————————–

     Here is a good read

    July 30, 2014. U.S Environment and Public Works Committee Republicans released a report today HIGHLIGHTING THE COLLUSION BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS

    It is a 92 page document on who’s who at the NGO zoo

    AND A REPORT ON HOW THEY DO IT!

    ———————————————————————————–

     IF IT’S FEDERAL LAW… IT’S LOCAL LAW

    In the United States today, our lives are governed by literally millions of laws, rules and regulations that govern even the smallest details of our lives, and more laws, rules and regulations are constantly being added. 

    ———————————————–

    LAYING DOWN MORE  FEDERAL LAW

    On January 1st, with thousands of  new FEDERAL laws going into effect all over America

    The trickle- down, RUBBER STAMP effect, will most LIKELY create,  hundreds of  thousands of restrictive new STATE, COUNTY, CITY, RULES AND REGULATIONS PRECIPITATED BY THE FEDERAL laws THAT went into effect FROM WA DC.

    ————————————————–

    USING  AND ABUSING THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ACT

    The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) is the law under which SOME 55 U.S. GOVERNMENT FEDERAL REGULATORY AGENCIES LIKE THE FDA AND EPA CREATE…. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF NEW TRICKLE-DOWN  FEDERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS …

    DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW IS?

    ————————————————————————————-

    THE RUBBER STAMPING IN WA STATE…

    WAC… WAC… WAC…rules and regulations

    On the national, state and local levels, UNINFORMED AMERICANS continue to ALLOW LEFT WING  LIBERAL’S  TO LAY DOWN FEDERAL LAWS, THAT SHALL BE AN EDICT,   TO TELL ALL THE REST OF US HOW TO RUN VIRTUALLY EVERY ASPECT OF OUR LIVES, IN EVERY COUNTY,CITY AND TOWN IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    —————————————————————————————-

    Here is a good read

    America Is Being Systematically Transformed Into A Totalitarian Society

    By Michael Snyder, on January 7th, 2013

    http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/america-is-being-systematically-transformed-into-a-totalitarian-society


  • The “Magic” Immigration Act

    The Magic Immigration Disappearing ACT?

    NOW YOU SEE THEM? NOW YOU DON’T?

    57,000 ILLEGAL’S?

    Feds Announce SURPRISE PLAN To End Use Of Military Facilities For Immigrant Children

    The NEW Magic Immigration Disappearing ACT?

    About 57,000 minors, mostly from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, crossed into the U.S. since October. MORE THAN 30,000 HAVE BEEN RELEASED TO SPONSORS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY, INCLUDING 211 IN WASHINGTON STATE.

    Indeed, THIS IS NOT  ” A MAGIC DISAPPEARING ACT “

    IT IS “THE NEW IMMIGRATION CATCH AND RELEASE ILLEGAL ALIENS ACTION PROGRAM”

    MAGIC by definition: conjuring tricks and illusions that make apparently impossible things seem to happen, a supposed supernatural power that makes impossible things happen

    ACT by definition; behavior that is intended to impress or deceive other people,  somebody’s actions or behavior considered as entertainment or used as an assessment of that person’s worth

    The disappearance of 57,000 ILLEGALS is definitely an ACT!

    ———————————————————————————————————-

    NOW YOU SEE THEM, 57,000 ILLEGAL’S? NOW YOU DON’T?

    MORE THAN 30,000 illegal’s  released …. And? What happened to the other 27,000?

    They have definitely “NOT”  fallen off the American gravy train.

     IF THEY ARE IN THE U.S.A., THEY ARE ALL ON THE AMERICAN GRAVY TRAIN,  by definition: a position in which a person or group receives excessive and unjustified money or advantages …

    ——————————————————————————————————

    Have the 57,000 illegal’s, illegally  crossed US borders  and fallen into the arms of?

    The Immigration Dream Act?

    ——————————————————————————

    Illegal immigrants released to illegal immigrants?

    AS 57,000 illegal’s, are moving forward in the continuation, of the “GENERATIONAL” illegal immigration pattern,  on the path to citizenship created and promoted by?

    The Immigration Dream Act?

    “How’s come it’s gone from 1,200, now it’s down to 190 children at Fort Sill? Well the answer is, the children are being released. And they are being released to sponsors who are in the country themselves illegally,” Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) told Fox News. “It’s very difficult to understand who we are releasing these children to and certainly it’s impossible to do criminal background checks on people who are in this country illegally.”

    Who are these Illegal immigrants being released to? illegal immigrants?

    ———————————————————————————————–

    The Immigration Dream Act?

    DREAM by definition: something that somebody hopes, longs, or is ambitious for, usually something difficult to attain or far removed from present circumstances.

    ACT by definition; behavior that is intended to impress or deceive other people,  somebody’s actions or behavior considered as entertainment or used as an assessment of that person’s worth

    ———————————————————————————————

    The CREST Immigration Act?

    CREST by definition, McCain’s office just said that “it’s an acronym.” So just a catchy word. many acronyms attempt to relate to the subject of the bill, but some (like CREST) are just completely random.

    —————————————————————

    How about? The new immigrants CATCH AND RELEASE ACT? (NICRA)

    Don’t you just love the words to describe the 57,000 illegal immigrants?

    Children? (when it has been reported that 91% are TEENAGERS)

    Children Jul 22, 2014 – According to a new Pew Research report, in fiscal year 2013, 91% OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT “CHILDREN” APPREHENDED AT THE BORDER WERE TEENAGERS.

    Good Grief!  What is 91% of 57,000 that are illegal Teenage immigrants?

    51,870 TEENAGERS? How many documented their AGE? How many are males? From how many different countries? How many are GANG affiliated?

    ———————————————————————————

    The new Immigration CATCH AND RELEASE Disappearing ACT?

    The Immigration Dream Act?

    The CREST Immigration Act?

    ————————————————————————————-

    Host? Shelter? House? caring for?  detain?

    Indeed, it is not “A MAGIC DISAPPEARING  ACT”

    it is “THE NEW IMMIGRATION CATCH AND RELEASE ILLEGAL ALIENS ACTION PROGRAM”

    Feds Announce Surprise Plan To End Use Of Military Facilities For Immigrant Children … end it use of three military bases to HOUSE illegal immigrant children … “As a result, we expect the Ft. Sill facility to no longer be CARING FOR …

    Lewis-McChord will not HOST unaccompanied minors

    Mass. military bases no longer asked to SHELTER immigrant CHILDREN

    Our military bases are no place to house DETAINED CHILDREN,” said Rep. Martha Roby, an Alabama Republican who led the charge against HHS …

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    the bottom line

    Indeed, it is not “A MAGIC DISAPPEARING ACT”

    It is “THE NEW IMMIGRATION CATCH AND RELEASE ILLEGAL ALIENS ACTION PROGRAM”

    As 57,000 illegal’s, are moving forward in the continuation, of the “GENERATIONAL” illegal immigration pattern,  following the path to American citizenship, created and promoted by,

    The Immigration Dream Act?

    This is an American Nightmare.

     


  • What Happens In WA DC?

    What Happens In WA DC - Should Not Stay in DC

    July 30, 2014. U.S Environment and Public Works Committee Republicans released a report today highlighting the collusion between environmental activists

     ——————————————————————————————-

     Someone sent me an email attachment with information.

    The message? Add this to the Clouded Waters collection, out of the same folks in DC.  Just released the other day.

     ———————————————————————————-

     United States Senate

    July 30, 2014  Committee on Environment and Public Works

    Minority Staff Report

    The Chain of Environmental Command

    How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA

    , … read more online

    REPORT: The Chain of Environmental Command

    —————————————————————–

    This is a 92 PAGE US Senate Committee report, questioning,  HOW THE  VERY RICH  FUND NON-GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO CONTROL  US GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND on  page 49, how it could be possible to Convert Charitable Donations into Political Outcomes?

    a  part of the conclusion

    page 67 Finally, this report is necessarily limited in its scope AND ONLY SCRATCHES THE SURFACE IN ITS EFFORT TO DOCUMENT THE MONEY TRAIL. Furthermore, as the Committee’s jurisdiction is limited to oversight of the EPA and energy and environmental policy, so too this report is constrained to reviewing activities intended to influence such policy. There is an abundance of evidence to suggest that this system is replicated across the progressive coalition. More investigation and oversight is needed.

    ——————————————————————————-

     After I read the report?

    I called Luke Bolar — Luke_Bolar@epw.senate.gov (202) 224-6176.

    I spoke with Sarah.

    I commended the committee for doing the report.

    My questions and comments to Sarah included,

    So? A whole bunch of Billionaires have purchased? (for want of a better word)

    The NGO’S Control of the US Environmental Policy?

    The Ties that Bind: Key Relationships Between Facilitators, Donors, and Activists

    page 51 Activist Public Charities FUNNEL MONEY TO POLITICAL AFFILIATES?

     ———————————————————————————————

    My thoughts on this report are that it creates more questions than answers?

    THE CAUSE? WITHOUT THE EFFECT? (not in the report?)

    HOW DOES THIS NGO EPA CONTROL EFFECT AND AFFECT AMERICAN TAXPAYERS?

    How can this report be equated, to the cost to AMERICAN TAXPAYERS, OF THE EPA’S $300 TO $500 BILLION DOLLARS IN UNFUNDED EPA MANDATES being  trickled down to “We the People” by the Clean Water and Air Acts?

    ————————————————————————–

    THE MONEY’S ALL GONE? WHERE DID IT GO?

    page 49 Converting Charitable Donations into Political Outcomes?

    As previously discussed, foundations, public charities and activist organizations that register as 501(c)(3) organizations receive certain tax benefits under the law. In return, there are strict limitations on how the money can be spent. For example, as also previously discussed, 501(c)(3) groups are strictly forbidden from “directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in a political campaign for or against a candidate for political office.”316 Accordingly, the Billionaire’s Club and activist groups organized as public charities have limited means to influence elections without jeopardizing their designated tax exempt status.

     

    FOLLOW THE MONEY?

    It is unclear what purpose the transfer of funds between these two organizations serves, other than obscuring the money trail?

    However, the Committee found that in many cases a 501(c)(3) will transfer funds to an affiliated 501(c)(4), which can engage in political activity. Under the law, these donations must only be used for activities within the permissible scope of the 501(c)(3)’s activities.317

    It is uncertain WHETHER THE IRS STRICTLY OVERSEES to ensure this requirement is met.

    this is especially true GIVEN THE ENORMOUS AND DIFFICULT TASK OF TRACKING AND ACCOUNTING FOR THE VAST SUMS OF MONEY THAT PASS THROUGH SEVERAL DIFFERENT GROUPS.

     FOLLOW THE MONEY?

     page 51 Activist Public Charities FUNNEL MONEY TO POLITICAL AFFILIATES?

    PAGE 53 In addition to LCV, the National Resources Defense Council,343 the Environmental Defense Fund,344 the Sierra Club345 and 350.org346 also set up affiliate nonprofit organizations to operate in this manner. The large amounts of money, multiple transfers, and questionable regulation strongly suggest that 501(c)(3) environmental groups and foundations are exceeding the scope of their tax exempt limits by financially supporting politically active 501(c)(4)s.

    Although the IRS Form 990s provide space to describe the purpose of a group’s grant, the descriptions given are often vague and overly broad. The circumstances surrounding the flow of money from 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups, and the likelihood of lax oversight, raises questions as to whether 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundations and charities are indirectly funding political activities

    page 60 e. The Billionaire’s Club Collaborating with Shady Foreign Funders?

    The Committee has also uncovered evidence that the Billionaire’s Club knowingly collaborates with shady offshore funders to maximize support for the far-left environmental activists they sponsor.

     

     

    The Obama EPA Helps to Fund the Far-Left Environmental Groups?

    page 29 In addition to providing insider access to important policy decisions, it appears activists now at EPA ALSO FUNNEL GOVERNMENT MONEY THROUGH GRANTS TO THEIR FORMER EMPLOYERS AND COLLEAGUES.

    The Committee’s research demonstrates that oftentimes EPA contributes to the bottom line of green groups through grants. Accordingly, A GRANT FROM EPA OR ANOTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY IS PARTICULARLY VALUABLE TO A 501(C)(3) AS NONPROFITS ARE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ONE-THIRD OF ITS FUNDING from the public to maintain its tax-exempt status. A grant from EPA contributes to that goal, without limitation.184

    OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS EPA HAS AWARDED NEARLY $3 BILLION IN GRANTS TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.185

    Based on a Committee review of the EPA grants database, the Obama EPA has given more than $27 million in taxpayer funded grants to major environmental groups. Notably, NRDC and EDF – two key activists groups with significant ties to senior EPA officials – have collected more than $1 million in funding each.

    ————————————————————————————–

    page 25 Indeed, the NRDC staff absorbed by the Obama Administration and Capitol Hill Democrats in 2009 WAS REFERRED TO AS THE “NRDC MAFIA” because they occupied so many key positions throughout the democratically controlled government.148 While at EPA, these officials were able to advance their activist agenda, this time with full support of the government.

    page 26 Watchdog groups also uncovered Enck using her personal email to communicate with environmentalists in violation of EPA policy

    PAGE 32 This highly questionable behavior demonstrates how an EPA official with inappropriate ties to far-left groups and their foundations can use her position to benefit the environmental movement AT THE EXPENSE OF TAXPAYERS

    One case involved a Presidential appointee violating their ethics pledge on 13 occasions by communicating and/or meeting with two prohibited organizations regarding their EPA work.201 Another case involved a political appointee who on two occasions violated the rules of ethics for federal employees by accepting a gift of travel and a flight in a private jet from a registered lobbyist.202

    page 33 while benefiting from nonprofit status, essentially sell a product to wealthy foundations who are seeking to drive policy and political outcomes.

    page 27 Ironically, at the time he was appointed to the EPA, he was actually suing EPA, along with other environmental activists on the basis of environmental justice concerns.165

    page 30 Yet, ALA has been a main litigant against EPA, frequently suing the Agency only to reach a cozy settlement agreement while taxpayers foot the bill for ALA’s legal fees

    Mainstream environmental groups are not the only ones to benefit from EPA grants. The Obama EPA gives grants to regional and less-well-known extreme groups

    —————————————————————————————————

    My questions and comments to Sarah included,

    Why? The Sovereign Tribes ARE NOT INCLUDED as part of the Billionaires EPA Environmental Control Club?

    page 23 where “our” is the EPA Office of International and Tribal Affairs and “there” refers to the White House. In another outrageous email exchange, former Assistant Administrator for the Office of International and Tribal Affairs, Michelle DePass, and “Richard Windsor,” former Administrator Jackson’s alias, strategize over

    page 25 These email exchanges confirm the close relationships between the foundations, environmental activist groups and the Obama Administration

    —————————————————————————————-

     

     

    United States Senate

    Committee on Environment and Public Works

    Minority Staff Report

    The Chain of Environmental Command

    How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA

     

     

     Contact: Luke Bolar — Luke_Bolar@epw.senate.gov (202) 224-6176Cheyenne Steel — Cheyenne_Steel@epw.senate.gov (202) 224-6176U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (Minority)

     

    (I have included some of the most recognizable NGO names)

     

    Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)

    Type: 501(c)(3)453

    Total Assets: $12,282,335454

     

    Greenpeace Fund

    Type: 501(c)(3)467

    Total Assets: $15,313,140468

    Greenpeace Inc.

    Type: 501(c)(4)472

    Total Assets: $5,121,059473

     

    Sierra Club Foundation

    Type: 501(c)(3)508

    Total Assets: $98,974,748

     

    National Wildlife Federation (NWF)

    Type: 501(c)(3)495

    Total Assets: $66,456,891496

    National Wildlife Federation (NWF) Action Fund

    Type: 501(c)(4)501

    Total Assets: $604,386502

     

    Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Action Fund

    Type: 501 (c)(4)504

    Total Assets: $2,955,590505

     

    July 30, 2014

    Contact: Luke

    Contents

    INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………….1

    I. Legal Framework of Far-Left Environmental Movement …………………….3

    a. 501(c)(3) Private Foundations and Public Charities…………………………..3

    b. The 501(c)(4) ……………………………………………………………………………………8

    II. The Billionaire’s Club: Leveraging their Investment………………………….11

    a. The Ties that Bind: Key Relationships Between Facilitators, Donors, and Activists ………………………………………………………………………………………..11

    b. The Facilitators: Key Environmental Activists………………………………..18

    c. The Face of the Environmental Movement: Public Charity Activists.21

    III. The Bureaucrats: How the Obama EPA is Deeply Intertwined with the Billionaire’s Club and their Far-left Environmental Activists…………………..23

    a. EPA’s Green Revolving Door………………………………………………………….23

    b. The Obama EPA Helps to Fund the Far-Left Environmental Groups 29

    c. Questionable Behavior by Regional Administrator Judith Enck………31

    IV. Billionaire’s Club in Action: Case Studies of Services Rendered………33

    a. Activists Groups Provide Billionaire’s Club with Propaganda…………33

    b. Activist Groups Provide Billionaire’s Club with Artificial Grassroots Movements…………………………………………………………………………………………..38

    c. Converting Charitable Donations into Political Outcomes……………….49

    d. Fiscal Sponsorships Provide the Billionaire’s Club with Access to Nimble and Transient Groups and also Provide Distance from their Hired Hands ………………………………………………………………………………………………….54

    e. The Billionaire’s Club Collaborating with Shady Foreign Funders….60

    CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………….67

    APPENDIX A: TOP FOUNDATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL GIVING 68

    APPENDIX B: ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS………………………………………….73


  • “The U.S. Immigrant Invasions” 1862-2014

    “The U.S. Immigrant  Invasions” 1862-2014

    2014 THE “IMMIGRANT  INVASION” THAT COULD THREATEN THE AMERICAN  DREAM? AND, THE SECURITY, SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS.

    2014 ZERMENO SAID THE INFECTED IMMIGRANTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED DURING MEDICAL CHECKS IN TEXAS, BUT WERE NOT BECAUSE???

    2014 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS? THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS? HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO?

    YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN 2014…2015….2016….

    FOR ONLY $3.7 BILLION AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS?

    ———————————————————————————————————

    1862-2014 IMMIGRATION ISSUES AND CONGRESSIONAL ACTS IN THE U.S.A.

    CONGRESS PASSED  THE FIRST IMMIGRATION RESTRICTION LAW IN 1862

    THE  1897 IMMIGRANT INVASION” THAT COULD THREATEN THE AMERICAN DREAM?

    Congress passed the bill in 1897

    ———————————————————————————–

    IMMIGRATION ISSUES 1946 AND 2014

    1946 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO MANHATTAN FOR LACK OF ROOM

    2014 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS? THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS? HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO?  YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN 2014…2015….2016 FOR ONLY $3.7 BILLION AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS?

    ZERMENO SAID THE INFECTED IMMIGRANTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED DURING MEDICAL CHECKS IN TEXAS, BUT WERE NOT BECAUSE???

    THEY HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO? BUSSED AND FLOWN TO EVERY STATE IN THE UNION?

    INFECTED IMMIGRANTS, CARRYING THEIR UNSCREENED? UNTREATED?

    CONTAGIOUS HEALTH DESEASES WITH THEM?

    HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO? BUSSED AND FLOWN TO EVERY MILITARY BASE IN THE USA?

     

    —————————————————————————–

    LEARNING FROM HISTORICAL CONGRESSIONAL SOLUTIONS?

    1. THE ORIGIONAL ACT IMMIGRANT INVASION” THAT COULD THREATEN THE AMERICAN DREAM. …

    Congress passed the bill in 1897

    ————————————————————————————————————————

    2. 1917 IMMIGRATION ACT

    (An act to regulate the immigration of aliens) the U.S. CONGRESS enacted the first widely restrictive immigration law. ... SECURITY during World War I made it possible for Congress to pass this Act, and it …

    —————————————————————-

     

    3. THE 1921 EMERGENCY QUOTA LAW

    (an act to limit the immigration of aliens into the United States)

    CONGRESS PASSED THE 1921 Emergency Quota LAW (an act to limit the immigration of aliens into the United States)

    ——————————————————————————-

    4. THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1924 (THE JOHNSON- REED ACT)

    The U.S. CONGRESS  enacted the first widely restrictive immigration law. ... SECURITY

     THE 1924 IMMIGRATION ACT REDUCING THE ANNUAL QUOTA AND THIS MARKED THE END OF MASS IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA.

    —————————————————————————————-

    5. IMMIGRATION-ACT-WAS PASSED-OVER-PRESIDENT’S -VETO

     

    6. The main function of (Ellis Island) changed from that of an immigrant processing station, TO A CENTER OF THE

    ASSEMBLY, DETENTION, AND DEPORTATION OF ALIENS WHO HAD ENTERED THE U.S. ILLEGALLY OR HAD VIOLATED THE TERMS OF ADMITTANCE.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    1924 IMMIGRATION PROBLEM SOLVED BY ACTS OF THE U.S. CONGRESS

    INCLUDING THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

     

    BOTTOM LINE “ASSEMBLE-DETAIN-DEPORT”

    THE END OF ILLEGAL MASS IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA

    ————————————————————————————

    OOPS… THE NEVER ENDING DOCUMENTATION…

    1946 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO MANHATTAN FOR LACK OF ROOM

    2014 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS? THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS? HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO?  YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN 2014…2015….2016  FOR ONLY $3.7 BILLION AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS?

    ZERMENO SAID THE INFECTED IMMIGRANTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED DURING MEDICAL CHECKS IN TEXAS, BUT WERE NOT BECAUSE???

    THEY HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO? BUSSED AND FLOWN TO EVERY STATE IN THE UNION?

    INFECTED IMMIGRANTS, CARRYING THEIR UNSCREENED? UNTREATED?

    CONTAGIOUS HEALTH DISEASES WITH THEM?

    HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO? BUSSED AND FLOWN TO EVERY MILITARY BASE IN THE USA?

    ———————————————————————————————–

    documentation?  read more  HISTORY OF IMMIGRATION ACTS IN THE U.S..

    IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1921 IMPOSES QUOTA  SYSTEM, 1921-1924

    cautioned of AN IMMIGRANT INVASION” THAT COULD THREATEN THE AMERICAN DREAM. … language, and although Congress passed the bill in 1897, President Grover … wealthiest citizens were illiterate when they first arrived on American shores.

    www.dentonisd.org/cms/lib/TX21000245/…/Immigration%20Act.pdf

    ———————————————————————————————

    U.S. IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION: 1921 EMERGENCY QUOTA LAW

    1921 EMERGENCY QUOTA LAW (AN ACT TO LIMIT THE IMMIGRATION OF ALIENS INTO THE UNITED STATES). H.R. 4075; Pub.L. 67-5; 42 Stat. 5. 67th Congress; May 19, 1921. … aliens who were passing through the US or visiting as tourists or temporary … Eugenics Laws Restricting Immigration – An essay linking immigration laws in the first …

    library.uwb.edu/…/usimmigration/192

    University of Washington, Bothell

    ————————————————————————————————————————–

    Subsequent immigration to the United States sharply declined, and, in 1924 a law was passed requiring immigrant inspection in countries of origin, leading to the closure of Ellis Island and other major immigrant processing centers.

     

    IMMIGRATION-ACT-PASSED-OVER-PRESIDENT WILSONS-VETO

     

    http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/immigration-act-passed-over-wilsons-veto

    —————————————————————————————————–

    THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1924 (THE JOHNSON- REED ACT)-1921…

    https://history.state.gov/…/1921…/immigration-act

    Office of the Historian

    The quota provided immigration visas to two percent of the total number of …

    IN 1917, THE U.S. CONGRESS ENACTED THE FIRST WIDELY RESTRICTIVE IMMIGRATION LAW. ... SECURITY during World War I made it possible for Congress to pass this Act, and it …

     

    THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1924 further restricted immigration, changing the quota basis from the census of 1910 to that of 1890, and REDUCING THE ANNUAL QUOTA TO SOME 164,000. THIS MARKED THE END OF MASS IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA.

    1924

    The main function of Ellis Island changed from that of an immigrant processing station, TO A CENTER OF THE ASSEMBLY, DETENTION, AND DEPORTATION OF ALIENS WHO HAD ENTERED THE U.S. ILLEGALLY OR HAD VIOLATED THE TERMS OF ADMITTANCE.

     

    ————————————————————————————

    HISTORY OF IMMIGRATION LAWS IN THE U.S.-EBSCOHOST….

    Between 1872 and 1890, Congress passed laws restricting the immigration of, among … Laws passed in 1885 and 1887 were among the first to restrict immigration … From 1900 to 1921, Congress established a “quota system,” which granted …

    connection.ebscohost.com >Home US>ImmigrationRestrictions

    ————————————————————————————————————

    ELLIS ISLAND·  opened in 1892 as a federal immigration station, a purpose it served for more than 60 years (it closed in 1954).

    www.history.com/topics/ellis-island

    1892? 1890?  The first immigrant to pass through Ellis  Island.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    1897 In five years, some 1.5 million immigrants had been processed.

    ———————————————————————

    1907

    THIS WAS THE PEAK YEAR AT ELLIS ISLAND WITH 1,004,756 IMMIGRANTS RECEIVED. THE ALL-TIME DAILY HIGH WAS ON APRIL 17TH OF THIS YEAR WHEN A TOTAL OF 11,747 IMMIGRANTS WERE PROCESSED

    ———————————————————————————

    1921

    Post-war immigration quickly revived and 560,971 immigrants passed through Ellis Island in 1921. THE FIRST IMMIGRATION QUOTA LAW PASSED THE U.S. CONGRESS, adding to the administration problems at Ellis Island. It provided that the number of any European nationality entering in a given year could not exceed three percent of foreign-born persons of that nationality who lived in the U.S. in 1910. NATIONALITY WAS TO BE DETERMINED BY COUNTRY OF BIRTH, and no more than 20 percent of the annual quota of any nationality could be received in any given month. The total number of immigrants admissible under the system was set at nearly 358,000, but numerous classes were exempt

    ——————————————————————————

    1924

    THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1924 further restricted immigration, changing the quota basis from the census of 1910 to that of 1890, and reducing the annual quota to some 164,000. THIS MARKED THE END OF MASS IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA.

    The Immigration Act also provided for the examination and qualification of immigrants at U.S. consulates overseas.

    ———————————————————————————————————————-

    1924

    The main function of Ellis Island changed from that of an immigrant processing station, TO A CENTER OF THE ASSEMBLY, DETENTION, AND DEPORTATION OF ALIENS WHO HAD ENTERED THE U.S. ILLEGALLY OR HAD VIOLATED THE TERMS OF ADMITTANCE.

    ——————————————————————————–

    1938-1941

    After the U.S. entered the war in December 1941, ELLIS ISLAND SERVED PRIMARILY AS A DETENTION CENTER FOR ALIEN ENEMIES, THOSE CONSIDERED TO BE INADMISSIBLE AND OTHERS. BY 1946, APPROXIMATELY 7000 ALIENS AND CITIZENS, WITH GERMAN, ITALIAN, AND JAPANESE PEOPLE COMPRISING THE LARGEST GROUPS, WERE DETAINED AT ELLIS ISLAND.

    1946 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO MANHATTAN FOR LACK OF ROOM

    2014 THE DETAINEES BECAME SO NUMEROUS? THAT THE IMMIGRATION FUNCTIONS? HAD TO BE TRANSFERRED TO?

    YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN 2014…2015….2016

     

     


  • “Thou Shalt Not Kill?”

    Thou Shalt Not Kill?

    CHICAGO FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND TOLL: 82 SHOT, 14 OF THEM FATALLY

    Most victims were in their late teens and 20s.

    AND, THEY WERE MOSTLY GANG RELATED

    Children live and “DIE” what they learn in cities across America

    They learned and were taught?  GANG RELATED SURVIVAL AND RETALIATION,, concentrated in the black neighborhoods, that you’re either going to be shot at or you’re going to shoot.

    ——————————————————————–

    TEACH OUR CHILDREN WELL?

    WELL? They learned and were taught?  GENERATIONAL GANG MEMBERSHIP?

    When asked why they joined a gang? The family’s GENERATIONAL gang membership?

    What happened to

    RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE?

    THOU SHALT NOT KILL?

    ——————————————————–

    TEACH OUR CHILDREN WELL?

    TEACH OUR POLICE, AS WELL.

    POLICE RESPONSE  five  were shot by police on Friday and Saturday, two boys 14 and 16 who were killed.

    ———————————————————————————————

    WELL? CHILDREN HAVE BEEN TAUGHT AND LEARNED GANG RETALIATION BEHAVIOR

    REVENGE IS MINE….

    Their gang shot my gang and I’m going to shoot their gang back.

    The learned and were taught?  THE GENERATIONAL GANG CODE.

    ————————————————————————————-

    SOLUTIONS? (The police have none, their jails are full)

    And, their hospitals and morgues are full, and the length of time that will be spent on the police investigation of who did what to whom and when?

    And the excuses?

    Chicago claims to have some of the toughest gun laws in the country, but the problem is they don’t enforce the laws.

    Conti explained that prosecutors get the gun charges and it’s too much work, too many man hours, the courts are overwhelmed, the prisons are overcrowded – so they knock the charges down to misdemeanors.

    —————————————————————————————–

    Why would anyone have a problem with this?

    TWO BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT MINORS?

    The surge of illegal immigrant minors rushing over the Rio Grande threatens to overwhelm the Texas Border Patrol, and new figures show the unexpected development will cost U.S. taxpayers more than $2 billion this year, 1200 WOAI news reports.

    WHEN THE US GOVERNMENT CAN’T FIND  THE US TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THE RESTORATION OF LAW AND ORDER IN AMERICA. ( AKA DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY)

    CHICAGO FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND TOLL: 82 SHOT, 14 OF THEM FATALLY

    ———————————————————————————————–
    SOLUTION?

    START POSTING SIGNS, ON BULLET RIDDEN HOME, LAWNS, BILLBOARDS  AND ON POLICE CARS.

    MAKE AND WEAR T SHIRTS (with pictures of the victims)

    “THOU SHALT NOT KILL”

    Innocent bystanders

    The police

    Gang members

    Each other

    Make your voice heard by US Government (demand accountability from congress ) send emails, picket and post on your websites, send letters to the editor of your newspaper.

    —————————————–

    OR?  JUST DO NOTHING?

    If you always do what you always did? You will always get what you always got.

    ————————————————————————-

    HOW BAD WAS IT?

    CHICAGO FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND TOLL: 82 SHOT, 14 OF THEM FATALLY

    July 07, 2014 / Written By The Chicago Tribune

    read more at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-fourth-of-july-toll-82-shot-14-of-them-fatally-in-chicago-20140707,0,5439185.story

    The bloodiest stretch of the weekend was a 13-hour period between 2:30 p.m. Sunday and 3:30 a.m. Monday when four people were killed and at least another 26 wounded, many of them in critical condition.

    And the most chaotic scene was in South Chicago, where three people were wounded during a running gun battle.

    It started when someone shot and wounded a couple, then two people fired at the shooter, then there was a chase and shots exchanged and a man sitting on a porch was hit. Responding officers kept cutting each other off on their radios as they reported other gunfire in the area late Sunday night and early Monday morning.

    two woman were shot as they sat outside a two-flat within a block of Garfield Park.

    three people were killed and 10 others wounded. An attack outside a West Englewood salon left two men dead and an East Garfield Park shooting took the life of a 21-year-old woman.

    20 people were shot, one fatally. The man who died had been flashing gang signs in a parking lot in the Clearing neighborhood when someone told him to stop. When the man didn’t, he was shot, police said.

    four people were killed and another 10 wounded.

    ————————————————————————————————

    Live by the sword, die by the sword” is a saying derived from a biblical parable to the effect that if you use violence, or other harsh means, against other people, you can expect to have those same means used against you; “You can expect to become a victim of whatever means you use to get what you want.”

    ——————————————————————————————-

    “Teach Your Children”

    YOU, WHO ARE ON THE ROAD MUST HAVE A CODE THAT YOU CAN LIVE BY.
    And so become yourself because the past is just a good bye.
    Teach your children well, their father’s hell did slowly go by,
    And feed them on your dreams, the one they fix, the one you’ll know by.
    Don’t you ever ask them why, if they told you, you would cry,
    So just look at them and sigh and know they love you.

    and you, of the tender years can’t know the fears that your elders grew by,
    and so please help them with your youth, they seek the truth before they can die.
    Teach your parents well, their children’s hell will slowly go by,
    And feed them on your dreams, the one they fix, the one you’ll know by.
    Don’t you ever ask them why, if they told you, you would cry,
    So just look at them and sigh and know they love you.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    Genesis 9:5-6 “WHOEVER SHEDS MAN’S BLOOD, BY MAN HIS BLOOD SHALL BE SHED

     

    Live by the sword, die by the sword” is a saying derived from a biblical parable to the effect that if you use violence, or other harsh means, against other people, you can expect to have those same means used against you; “You can expect to become a victim of whatever means you use to get what you want.”

    If you always do what you always did? You will always get what you always got.

     Exodus 21:22-25 “If men struggle with each other yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined

    “But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

     ————————————————————————————————————

    full text

    Scripture. Genesis 1:26-31. God created man and woman in his image. … Implicitly, however, it encourages a positive attitude of ABSOLUTE RESPECT FOR LIFE

     Scripture. Genesis 9:5-6  ”Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. “WHOEVER SHEDS MAN’S BLOOD, BY MAN HIS BLOOD SHALL BE SHED,

     Scripture. Exodus 21:22-25 “If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. “But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Chicago Warzone

    read more at: http://www.billoreilly.com/show?action=latestTVShow

    Noting that Chicago’s gun crimes are concentrated in the black neighborhoods and are mostly gang related, the Factor questioned whether there’s also a cultural problem in play.

    Greenberg pointed out it’s a question of survival for these people because so many of them have guns that you’re either going to be shot at or you’re going to shoot.

    ————————————————————————————————

     

     


  • $14.8 Billion for Restoration

    Sent to Representative Derek Kilmer,

    The bottom line?

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO  LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    Is anyone in congress addressing the Restoration of “Law and Order” to stop the 2014 epidemic of violent crimes against People across the United States Of America?

    Please ask CONGRESS to legislate  American RESTORATION tax  dollars wisely, in a country of the people, by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE.

    Pearl Rains Hewett
    Just a concerned American Grandmother

    ————————————————————

    $14.8 Billion for Restoration
    Posted on June 10, 2014 9:12 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    In the state of Maryland, their elected representatives, legislators, passed a $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR UNFUNDED, EPA MANDATED Rain Tax. (for storm water runoff)

    100% of the $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    The federal government and, every state legislature, provides restoration funding for the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, spending and granting billions of our American tax dollars.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF LEGISLATION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS?

    2009-2014 IT’S TIME TO PLAY CATCH UP.

    WHO KNEW?

    SINCE 2009 our legislators, elected representatives have been busy, busy, busy.

    THEY HAVE LEGISLATED, ECOLOGY (DOE) AND A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO BE IN CONTROL OF  THE TAXPAYERS FATE, FOR THE FUNDING AND COST OF WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF

    Stormwater Technical Resource Center

    The 176 PAGE REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

    Water Quality Program

    Washington State Department of Ecology

    Olympia, Washington

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    The passage of House Bill 2222 in 2009 set in motion the creation of THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER (Center)that would focus RESOURCES on protecting Washington’s waters through improvements in regional stormwater management.

    The Bill, codified in RCW 90.48.545, directs the state Department of

    Ecology(Ecology)“as funding becomes available… to create a stormwater technical resource center in partnership with a university, nonprofit organization, or other public or private entity to provide tools for stormwater management.

    TO PROVIDE SEED MONEY FOR CREATION OF THE CENTER, ECOLOGY SOLICITED GRANT PROPOSALS

    for a Center that would benefit stormwater management programs across Washington and support NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit programs.

    In late 2009, ECOLOGY AWARDED FUNDING to the City of Puyallup and its two primary associates: Washington State University (WSU) and the University of Washington(UW). Their charge was to convene an advisory committee to consult on the development and the overall administrative strategy of  a Stormwater Technical Resource Center.

    The ADVISORY COMMITTEE includes representatives from state agencies, local governments, the business community, the environmental community, tribes and the building and development industry.

    ——————————————————-

    THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER

    The Center has been established AS NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION.

    Center staff created a 5-Year Business Plan, (Appendix C), and has started to deliver the following services

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    Ecology (DOE) is working on Funding?

    During the past year, Ecology (DOE) has met with staff from THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, and the Advisory Committee to identify FUNDING strategies. While there is still a need for base-level support to grow the Center,

    FUNDING mechanisms for THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, include COST REIMBURSEMENT for technical reviews, trainings, MONITORING and other technical resource services. In addition, donations, endowments, BONDS, conferences, membership dues, GRANTS and support from in-kind services and DEDICATED ACCOUNTS are all evaluated in the Business Plan.

    ————————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO, LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    This entry was posted in Bang for their buck? Restoration, Controlled by Non-Profits?, Cut Federal Funding, Diverting Our Tax Dollars, Economic Impact, Elected Officials, EPA Clean Water Act, EPA UNFUNDED MANDATES, Follow the Money, Goliath’s Restoration Consortium, Government Accountability, If it’s Federal IT’S LOCAL, Learning From History?, Legislated Economic Oppression, Politically Motivated, Senate Hearings on EPA, Taken by the “GRANTED”, The Money’s All Gone?, The We’s who WANT, WA State Dept. of Ecology. Bookmark the permalink.Edit
    The “RESTORATION” Shell GameIn the state of Maryland, their elected representatives, legislators, passed a $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR UNFUNDED, EPA MANDATED Rain Tax. (for storm water runoff)

     100% of the $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    The federal government and, every state legislature, provides restoration funding for the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, spending and granting billions of our American tax dollars.

    —————————————————————————————————-

    WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF LEGISLATION AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS?

    2009-2014 IT’S TIME TO PLAY CATCH UP.

    WHO KNEW?

    SINCE 2009 our legislators, elected representatives have been busy, busy, busy.

    THEY HAVE LEGISLATED, ECOLOGY (DOE) AND A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO BE IN CONTROL OF  THE TAXPAYERS FATE, FOR THE FUNDING AND COST OF WA STATE STORMWATER RUNOFF

    Stormwater Technical Resource Center

    The 176 PAGE REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE

    Water Quality Program

    Washington State Department of Ecology

    Olympia, Washington

     

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

    The passage of House Bill 2222 in 2009 set in motion the creation of THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER (Center)that would focus RESOURCES on protecting Washington’s waters through improvements in regional stormwater management.

     

    The Bill, codified in RCW 90.48.545, directs the state Department of

    Ecology(Ecology)“as funding becomes available… to create a stormwater technical resource center in partnership with a university, nonprofit organization, or other public or private entity to provide tools for stormwater management.

     

     

    TO PROVIDE SEED MONEY FOR CREATION OF THE CENTER, ECOLOGY SOLICITED GRANT PROPOSALS

     for a Center that would benefit stormwater management programs across Washington and support NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) stormwater permit programs.

     

    In late 2009, ECOLOGY AWARDED FUNDING to the City of Puyallup and its two primary associates: Washington State University (WSU) and the University of Washington(UW). Their charge was to convene an advisory committee to consult on the development and the overall administrative strategy of  a Stormwater Technical Resource Center.

     

    The ADVISORY COMMITTEE includes representatives from state agencies, local governments, the business community, the environmental community, tribes and the building and development industry.

     

    ——————————————————-

     

    THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER

    The Center has been established AS NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION.

    Center staff created a 5-Year Business Plan, (Appendix C), and has started to deliver the following services

     

    http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/CommitteeFiles/Stormwater/1110009.pdf

     Ecology (DOE) is working on Funding?

    During the past year, Ecology (DOE) has met with staff from THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, and the Advisory Committee to identify FUNDING strategies. While there is still a need for base-level support to grow the Center,

    FUNDING mechanisms for THE STORMWATER TECHNICAL RESOURCE CENTER, the Center, include COST REIMBURSEMENT for technical reviews, trainings, MONITORING and other technical resource services. In addition, donations, endowments, BONDS, conferences, membership dues, GRANTS and support from in-kind services and DEDICATED ACCOUNTS are all evaluated in the Business Plan.

    ————————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    100% of the MARYLAND $14.8 Billion Dollars in storm water runoff tax dollars are MANDATED  to be spent on the “RESTORATION” of the NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

    IS WA STATE GOING TO FOLLOW MARYLAND’S LEAD? AND LEGISLATE AND MANDATE ALL OF OUR STORMWATER RUNOFF TAX DOLLARS TO  THE RESTORATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    RESTORATION OF SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT? vs: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT?

    WHEN ARE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE GOING TO PRIORITIZE AND START FUNDING THE RESTORATION OF AMERICA’S “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT.”

    THE EVERYDAY, DAY AFTER DAY, VIOLENT HORRIFYING  “SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT” THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS AND THEIR FAMILIES ARE BEING FORCED TO, LIVE WITH  IN THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS ACROSS THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

     


  • The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

    The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

    A highly convoluted “GAME OF RESTORATION” that  is involving the sleight of many, many hands, in which hundreds of  inverted Federal agencies, WA State agencies, WAC’S and /or other NGO, NUTSHELLS are moved about, and hard working taxpayers must attempt to spot which is the one, of many thousands, with  NGO’S or other government agencies are underneath the “RESTORATION” plan.

     

    WOW!  HOW MANY NUTS CAN YOU GET UNDER ONE RESTORATION SHELL?

    “WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE MORE THAN 600 PARTNERS TOGETHER,

    designing a unified plan, and making sure money is being spent efficiently, and our region is making progress,” says Gerry O’Keefe, executive director of the Puget Sound Partnership.

    In response to this growing environmental crisis, the Washington State legislature created the Puget Sound Partnership a state agency dedicated to identifying, prioritizing, and coordinating efforts to protect and RESTORE PUGET SOUND. Since its founding in 2007, the partnership has collaborated with state and federal agencies, local governments, tribes, businesses, and citizen groups to achieve specific cleanup and restoration goals for Puget Sound.

    ——————————————————————————————

    No doubt with MORE THAN 600 RESTORATION PARTNERS the following is a true statement

    In addition, multiple, overlapping jurisdictions and AUTHORITIES creates challenges for coordinated decision-making and proactive planning.

    Even the government is clueless, when it comes to how many nuts are responsible for  planning, authorizing and implementing the RESTORATION SHELL GAME .

    ———————————————————————————————–

    A DECEPTIVE? AND EVASIVE? NGO OR GOVERNMENT ACTION OR PLOY, ESPECIALLY A POLITICAL “GAME OF RESTORATION”  ONE.

    Who knew about this?

    (PSNERP) PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT
    A 373 PAGE REPORT ON THE RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND.

    THIS IS NOT A CASUAL REPORT OF RESTORATION FOR THE SMP UPDATE

    The PSNERP GI study area includes the entire portion of Puget Sound, and the Straits of Juan deFuca and southern Strait of Georgia that occur within the borders of the United States; data is also acquired for water shed drainage areas of Puget Sound rivers that extend into Canada.

     ————————————————————————————————

    Pursuant to WAC 197-11-900 (922-948),the department of ecology
    Under chapter 43.372 RCW,
    PACIFIC COAST MARINE SPATIAL PLAN (MSP).
    ———————————————————-
    A FEDERAL Part of the PUGET SOUND restoration plan
    FINAL May 2009, GEOSPATIAL METHODOLOGY USED IN THE PSNERP COMPREHENSIVE CHANGE ANALYSIS OF PUGET SOUND

    (PSNERP) PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT
    A 373 PAGE REPORT ON THE RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND

    The PSNERP GI study area includes the entire portion of Puget Sound, and the Straits of Juan deFuca and southern Strait of Georgia that occur within the borders of the United States; data is also acquired for water shed drainage areas of Puget Sound rivers that extend into Canada.

    This is not a casual report of RESTORATION for SMP mitigation.
    ——————————————-
    Pursuant to WAC 197-11-900 (922-948),the department of ecology
    Under chapter 43.372 RCW,
    PACIFIC COAST MARINE SPATIAL PLAN (MSP).
    Once the MSP is complete, ecology will submit it to the
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for its review and APPROVAL for incorporation into
    Washington’s FEDERALLY APPROVED coastal zone management program
    Under the 1972 CONGRESS ENACTED FEDERAL Coastal Zone Management ACT
    ——————————————————-
    Pursuant to WAC 197-11-900 (922-948),the department of ecology
    PACIFIC COAST MARINE SPATIAL PLAN (MSP).

    In addition, multiple, overlapping jurisdictions and AUTHORITIES creates challenges for coordinated decision-making and proactive planning.
    ————————————————-
    Coastal Zone Management Act – Office of Ocean and Coastal …
    coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/czm/czm_act.html‎

    Congressional Action to Help Manage Our Nation’s Coasts … growth in the coastal zone by passing the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) in 1972. The Act …
    ————————————————
    1972 CONGRESS ENACTS FEDERAL Clean water act
    CWA | Civil Enforcement | Compliance and Enforcement | U.S. EPA
    www.epa.gov/Compliance/civil/cwa/index.html‎