Tuesday, September 21, 2010

How to tell you're out of touch....

The Board of Supervisors held a public input session last night. In a wild display of public sentiment, the speakers for the Chesapeake Bay Protection Ordinance were outnumbered in a 4 to 1 thumping.
The message from the public is clear. Abandon the CBPO and draw up a less radical approach that does not include a land grab. Prove that the stream data isn't skewed to arrive at a pre-ordained conclusion, and let the particulars shine thru without covering the tenets of the planned implementation.
All of the above mentioned faults have been used in the current campaign. They hid the particulars, they never laid out the exact definition of a Perennial stream, and they never fully contacted the affected HOAs and major Agricultural stakeholders, despite the staff assuring us that they had.

The long line of folks to speak out against the Ordinance was led by Tony Howard, who heads the Loudoun Chamber of Commerce and it never really got better for the proponents of the Ordinance.
More prominent speakers following Mr. Howard were Purcellville Mayor, Bob Lazaro, who also represented Round Hill and Hamilton governments's positions against the Ordinance.

After seeing the stack of citizens and organizations against the ordinance, a local advocate for this bastardization of government control, John Flannery, was approached by a seasoned former correspondent to the White House. There was a shouting match and Flannery finally verbally assaulted the gentleman. That, to my mind, sums up the true colors of those who wanted to foist this thing onto Loudoun. When they have to deal with resistance, they'd rather shut down all logic and particulars and just go straight in for the beligerant and the heavy gestapo tactics.

Update: on the day following his comments to the Board of Supervisors, Tony Howard and his Chamber of Commerce (who represent every business in Loudoun as Stakeholders) were removed from that Stakeholder's list for speaking out of turn on this matter. More proof that under alot of makeup, this Board is uglier and uglier in their direction and intent.

Update: In passing the Ordinance back to land use -- the public can now ask them as many questions about the science, process, suggested changes to the Ordinance, and just questions as we want.
A very involved partner in this effort propses the following questions to be included in the process:

1. A copy of the original board direction for staff, a copy of the original direction to engage a Stakeholders group, a copy of the decision to add Stakeholders to the group (like Dulles Area Realtors), a copy of the resolution directing the CBPO proposal to be advertised, a copy of the resolution referring the CBPO to the Loudoun Planning Commission, and a copy of any motions or resolutions the Planning Commission made with respect to the draft Ordinance.

2. I would like to ask Staff to review and provide to the public all of the documents that they relied on in terms of authority to go forward with and manage the CBPO, in terms of preparing staff reports, formulating the proposed Ordinance, assistance in and actual forming of the stakeholder group and further in terms of notifying the public, in terms of notifying the HOA's and to provide those documents, and to further state whether staff believes it complied fully with the direction of the Board.

3. I would like Staff to affirmatively state why it refused to allow the Stakeholders or the Planning Commission to make changes to the proposed CBPO. Did Staff have any legal opinion to this effect? Was this simply a misunderstanding, or was there something in writing to this effect. If there was something in writing, I would ask that this be provided.

4. I would also ask that Staff provide all of the underlying data, benthic and otherwise, to support all testing in the possession of the County, including all the underlying data supporting the stream assessment of 2009 and all volunteer testing, and all underlying data of the DEQ testing.

5. I would like Staff to provide all data it has in support of the 100 foot buffers, and also all data to support staff's claims of buffer efficiency.

6. Further I would like to see all data or modeling information that staff has to show what if any a.) specific or b,)hypothetical benefit the buffers will provide to the Bay.

7. Did Staff make any attempt to quantify the benefit of imposing RPA and RMA on Loudoun to the Chesapeake Bay, with respect to nutrients or sediment? or with respect to any other benefit to the Bay?

8. According to any modeling information available, what will be the credit that Staff expects the County to be given if these RPA buffers are imposed by Ordinance?

9. Will the County receive any credit for RMA? Is there any modeling information or other data to support any benefit to the Bay for imposing RMA on Loudoun County?

10. Will the County receive EPA or State credit for anticipated future buffers, or only actual buffers installed?

Concerned citizens should ask these questions of the members of the Land Use Committee....it consist of Kelly Burk, Delgaudio, McGimpsy, York, Burton and Sally Kurtz.

Update: Buckley is still one of the most pragmatic on this board.
She's stepped in and advocated for the wider Stakeholders group, which I read as bringing Chamber of Commerce and Tony Howard back in. (After all, the Chamber of Commerce does speak for all of the commerce in the County)
Along with this smart step by Buckley was a small chorus of the main instigators of this travesty ....who belly-ached about Susan stabbing them in the back. Miller and Burton were the two biggest whiners. So , I suppose that they are strongly supportive of eliminating businesses from the county decisions. Miller's wife, in particular- guages a business' political contributions before shopping there....which is dangerously close to the point of lunacy. And severely narrows Stevens and her availability to get ANYTHING for their home(s)....because anyone in business ought to be a conservative these days.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Reflection and gloating

Back then, I told you...

Told you it was coming. Yet they elected him. Try that again anytime after June of 2010. LOL

Friday, September 10, 2010

As if we weren't mad enough...

(responding tongue-in-cheek to the woman who wrote the LTE "Now Republicans are mad?" to the Leesburg rag. In her letter, she goes down a really idiotic avenue where in she demonstrates her ignorance when she intimates that "the Supreme Court handed Bush the 2000 election". Anyone with half a brain understands that the Florida Supreme Court violated the law/constitution when they elected to "create" a law on how to count chads -- instead of convening the legislation to make a law on the matter, and when the SCOTUS called them on it, dems who have no use for the Constitution have repeated this turd, ad nauseum.....)

Lookee here. Seems that Lil' Timmy Geitner was just the tip of the iceberg....
Without giving names- 41 people in the current Administration (so adept at taxing you and me) are pulling a "Leona Helmsley" on the rest of us ("only little people pay taxes") by failing to pony up for the $831K that they owe in back taxes.
But wait, it gets worse. Remember the lashing dems gave Rangle?? Whatever will they do with the House of Representatives, where 421 people owe a total $6,524,892. (you DO KNOW that there are only 435 people in that body, right?
What about the Senate, where 217 people owe $2,774,836. That HAS GOT TO INCLUDE SOME STAFF, too.

But hold on...it's still coming.

Treasury Department 1,204 people owe $7,670,814 in back taxes.
Labor Department 463 people owe $7,481,463 in back taxes.
Federal Reserve System -Board of Governors 81 people owe $1,076,733 in back taxes.
Justice Department 1,971 employees owe $14,350,152 in back taxes.
Homeland Security 4,856 people owe $37,012,174 in back taxes.

Read the full details and the breakdown of the full tab

Common Cents Blog does a great report with Video of more tricks and trinkets by Dems that clearly show that they think they are entitled to take full advantage of their positions in order to fill their bank accounts.

Update: Ric over at HoodaThunk opines about the INTENT of Dems to see not paying taxes as perfectly acceptable here.

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Just another brick kicked out of the wall

Today's Washington Post (the liberal rag of choice) actually put some really good news on the front page today. The Potomac River is markedly improved, aside from some progress that still needs to occur. This is great news for those who endeavored to clean it up, and I applaud the efforts because , evidently, they were stepping stones in the improvement.
The bad news, is of course, that the Chesapeake Bay Protection ordinance was not in effect in either of the counties that now hope to introduce it's weighty constraints onto their peoples. Fairfax had not - at that time...and Loudoun hadn't enacted the draconian straps onto their businesses at all.
And in all that time, stream clarity and health began to rise in Loudoun, and the Potomac was getting cleaner...all without the ordinance.
I attribute most of this to the water and aquifer pollution running thru us from West Virginia's steep runoffs, as well as some of Maryland and Pennsylvania runoffs.

So, in truth, Loudoun's draconian adoption would not regulate "squat"....but it would be a major source of new income to the County coffers. And that new revenue would sit square atop of the farmers and business owner's shoulders.

Be sure to show up September 20, 2010 at the Government Center to tell the Supervisors to forget about raiding your pockets and shaking you upside down to be sure they've relieved you of all that hard-earned money -- just so they can "who wants to make some money -Now Supervisor Andrea McGimsey" on the imposed Ordinance.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

New TAXES coming... Crystal Conservative breaks it down

Bob Goodlatte does a guest post and breaks Dems down like a fraction.
When viewed in the context of the speech/campaign stop(?) last night, one begins to see how far from reality the dems actuallly are.