Archive for June, 2011

Although an “off the shelf ready”, “fill in the blank” and word for word verbatim the same…  Senator Owens in fact was awarded the three Bronze Star Medals that he claimed.  My apologies to Senator Owens.

Owens-Citations  (scroll down for better detail)

“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Anyone Who Threatens It”
Ken Dunwoody                                                              

Henpecked Acres                                                            
One Nation
14850 W. 159th St.
Olathe, Ks. 66062
kdunwoody2@aol.com www.NOlathe.com http://NOlathe.net http://NOjocoboco.net
View Sarah’s Story http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWuUvOZ7RY http://vimeo.com/23038312


Read Full Post »

Does The New ‘White House Rural Council’ = UN’s Agenda 21?

On June 9, 2011, President Obama signed his 86th Executive Order, and almost nobody noticed.

(For the record, Obama is on par to match President Bush’s 291 orders executed during his two terms in office. The National Archives defines an Executive Order this way; Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government.)

President Obama’s E.O. 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. Why didn’t we notice it? Weinergate. In the middle of the Anthony Weiner scandal, as the press and most of the American people were distracted, the President Obama created something called “The White House Rural Council” (WHRC).

Section One of 13575 states the following:

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America. 

The third sentence also makes it quite clear that the government intends to take greater control over “food, fiber, and energy.”

The last sentence in Section 1 further clarifies the intent of the order by tying together “access to the capital necessary for economic growth, health care and education.”

The new White House Rural Council will probably be populated by experts in the various fields that might prove helpful to the folks who live and work outside of large urban areas, right? Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:

  • (1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner
  • (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates
  • (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder
  • (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar
  • (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke
  • (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis
  • (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius
  • (8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan
  • (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood
  • (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu
  • (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan
  • (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki
  • (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano
  • (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson
  • (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps
  • (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag
  • (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren
  • (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske
  • (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee
  • (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress)
  • (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling
  • (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills
  • (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley
  • (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett
  • (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above)

It appears that not a single department in the federal government was excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agriculture secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.

Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:

Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems.

Is it possible that concerns about 13575 are just typical anti-government paranoia? Let us review the mission and function of WHRC:

Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council. The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.

“Economic prosperity” and a better “quality of life,” that all sounds fairly innocent and well-intentioned. But continuing deeper into the order we find the council is charged with four directives:

(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;

The vague language here sounds non-threatening. But, is there a hint here that a “rural stimulus plan” might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating “economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?” It is difficult to discern as the language is so broad.

We continue with the functions of the WHRC:

(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;

Virtually every aspect of rural life seems to now be part of the government’s mission. And while all of the items in (b) sound like typical government speak, you should be alarmed when you read the words “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs). NGOs are unelected, but typically government-funded groups that act like embedded community organizers. And NGOs are key to Agenda 21′s plans.


(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas;

That one sounds very similar to the language found in the United Nations plan for sustainable cities known as Agenda 21. Managing the population in both rural and urban areas, with a focus on controlling “open spaces.”

(d) and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities.

This function of Executive Order 13575 ties energy development with outdoor recreation and “other conservation related activities.” When did outdoor recreation become a conservation related activity?

Aside from the content of this order and some its vague intentions, the timing of the signing should also be considered. Later this month, Washington DC is hosting a meeting of the Agenda 21 operatives who are members of ICLEI:

Washington, D.C. – ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Series to be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.

As Secretary-General of Rio+20, Ambassador Sha Zukang will convene high-ranking leaders from government, the private sector and civil society to chart a pathway to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development decisions and the green economy through the creation of an institutional framework and inclusive participation.

The United Nations has pushed their sustainable development program for almost twenty years. The UN’s “social justice” blueprint called Agenda 21 requires governments to control almost all aspects of an individual’s life, but has recently met with substantial resistance in America. Since The Blaze covered this topic and the story appeared on Glenn Beck’s Fox TV program, we have been inundated with reports from around the country about efforts to remove ICLEI and Agenda 21 from local governments.

Carroll County, Maryland: Starting in February, 2011, all five newly elected county commissioners, led by Richard Rothschild, voted to become the first county in the nation to end the ICLEI contract.

Amador County, California: The Mother Lode Tea Party lead the successful effort to remove ICLEI form Amador County.

Montgomery County, Pennsylvania: Activists Ruth Miller and Maggie Roddin have raised awareness that lead to the removal of ICLEI.

Edmond, Oklahoma: Molly Jenkins motivated 200 people to attend the city council meeting and demand action against ICLEI.

Las Cruces, New Mexico: continues to debate the issue, but rational voices are gaining momentum in the community.

Spartanburg, South Carolina: City Councilman Roger Nutt successfully directed the effort against the program and Spartanburg became the 6th community to kick out ICLEI in a vote of 6-0 by City Council (with one abstention).

There have also been anti-ICLEI rallies held in several cities this week, with more planned in the near future:

  • June 27, 11:30am-3:00pm
    Exeter, NH, Exeter High School
  • June 27, 5:00pm-8:30pm
    Galveston, TX, Galveston Convention Center
  • June 27, 8:30am-5:00pm
    Ocean Shores, WA, Quinault Beach Resort and Casino
  • June 30, 1:00pm-5:00pm
    San Francisco Bay Area, CA, TBD
  • June 30, 10:00am-5:00pm
    West Long Branch, NJ, Monmouth University

There appears to be a developing, grass-roots movement to reject programs like Agenda 21. It remains to be seen if these groups might also reject a Washington-based control over rural lands, like the council created by Executive Order 13575.

As long as there’s not another Weinergate, maybe they’ll notice.

Read Full Post »

Shortly after being sworn in as Chairman, Eilert and the County Manager conspired to eliminate written “transcripts” of official BOCC meetings.  After this was made public https://nolathe.net/2011/02/26/our-clear-and-present-danger/  NOlathe notified all Commissioners repeatedly that this was illegal to do without a vote.  NOlathe also offered to pay the $25,000 estimated annual expense to continue providing the necessary “transcripts” to no avail.  As a last resort we notified the BOCC that this was a violation of the ADA (Americans Disability Act) depriving the hearing impaired from information discussed during official BOCC meetings.
Now months later, Chairman Eilert puts a happy face on this fiasco and claims his leadership has solved a major and long standing problem.  The other six Commissioners sit as if they are hearing impaired, their silence with this debacle is deafening.

Closed caption option begins for County Commission meetings

POSTED: 2:16 pm CDT June 8, 2011
The June 9 business session of the Johnson County Board of Commissioners will have a new feature – closed captioning for local residents watching on cable television or by webcast on the Internet. 
By turning on the closed caption feature on their TVs, viewers with hearing impairments can see and read text of the dialogue from the Board’s meeting for the first time, beginning Thursday.
The captions will be a boon for the deaf and the hard-of-hearing in Johnson County, Ed Eilert, chairman of the Board, said.
“It’s another significant step toward giving the public more access to the debate and decisions by the Board of County Commissioners and county management,” he said. “This will help to keep citizens in our deaf community more informed about their county government.
“The county installed a broadcasting/webcasting system, but without the closed captioning service, in 2008 in the Board’s hearing room to expand public accessibility to Johnson County citizens and improve general awareness of issues affecting county government.
The network involves partnership through an interlocal cooperation agreement with the city of Olathe. The agreement, which began in 2007, allows for county use of the city’s television production facility located in Olathe City Hall by linking the equipment between the two governments, resulting in cost savings in operating the system.
Olathe has had its television production facility for more than a decade. It includes cable TV facilities, cameras, a recording studio, editing suite, and closed-captioning equipment. The facility is regularly used for cable television broadcasts of Olathe City Council meetings and other city programs.
The county has been working to install closed captioning services on its network for the past year. The task included service upgrades to broadcasting equipment that were recently completed, tested, and now available.
The weekly business sessions of the Board of County Commissioners occur each Thursday, beginning at 9:30 a.m. in the Board’s hearing room located on the third floor of the Johnson County Administration Building, 111 South Cherry Street, in downtown Olathe. 

The meetings are televised through public access cable television on Comcast Channel 7 in the Olathe area and Time Warner Channel 2 covering much of northern and central Johnson County. The meetings also can be viewed through webcasting with a link on the county’s main website at http://www.jocogov.org.

Both the broadcasting and webcasting services will include closed captioning that requires activation of closed-captioning options that are available on personal televisions or computers.

Read Full Post »

On June 3, 2010 I made a presentation to the Johnson County Board of County Commissioners which compared the financial impacts on The City of Olathe choosing to not annex versus The City of Overland Park which chose to annex rural properties.   https://nolathe.net/2010/06/03/overland-park-four-years-from-insolvency/ 

Using graphs from https://nolathe.net/2010/06/01/a-tale-of-two-cities/ I predicted that The City of Overland Park would be insolvent within four years.  I was laughed at, scoffed and called a “wacko”.

But then one year later.. http://www.kccommunitynews.com/johnson-county-sun-news/28233074/detail.html


Revenue dip leads Overland Park to consider tax hike

Loren Stanton lorenstanton@npgco.com 913-385-6068

Overland Park officials are about to have their sales skills tested.

With the recession lingering and many citizens advocating smaller government and lower taxes, it is a tough political climate to pitch a tax hike. But that is precisely the task city leaders are contemplating as they begin 2012 budget discussions.

For decades, the city has ridden rising tides of economic expansion and sales tax collections. It was a nice ride while it lasted, but the tide turned thanks to three years of bad economy.

Revenue shortfalls, rising costs, and an increasing demand for street maintenance have created an imperfect storm of budgetary pressures.

In the first couple of recessionary years, the city tightened its belt, cut the work force and held the line on taxes.

But when Overland Park’s new city manager, Bill Ebel, and his staff put together an initial budget draft for 2012, the math proved painful.

To balance revenues and expenditures, Ebel found he would need to whack more City Hall jobs beyond the 60 already eliminated. He would need to decrease maintenance funding that already is millions of dollars below pre-recession levels. And he would need to reduce the commitment to public safety at a time the city is trying to counter some troubling crime trends in aging neighborhoods.

That initial draft was scrapped in favor of a budget containing a recommended property tax hike of either 3.6 or 4.1 mills.

Though they are not making any firm commitments, Mayor Carl Gerlach and council members are indicating a tax increase is justified.

Ebel and the elected officials say that saving money at the expense of basic services and infrastructure could hurt residents and businesses financially in the long run through decreased economic development and property values.

Such arguments surely would be the theme of a sales pitch for any property tax boost.

As logical and persuasive as that case might seem, however, the idea of higher taxes runs against city tradition and the nature of a council that primarily is composed of pro-business fiscal conservatives.

Asked if he could support a higher tax rate, Councilman Jim Hix spoke of his internal conflict.

“I’m going to give it serious consideration. It’ll be probably the most difficult decision I’ve had to make in my 10 years on the council,” Hix said.

The councilman counts himself among those who believe government spending and programs at all levels need to shrink. But…

“Quality of life cannot be ignored just for the sake of saying we are going to keep taxes down,” Hix said.

Because of Overland Park’s many thriving retail centers, it long has relied heavily on sales tax revenues. That has allowed the city to maintain such a low property tax level that even with the proposed increases the rate still would be less than that charged in any other Johnson County city by a wide margin.

But even the sales tax is failing to deliver now. The city is collecting 6 percent less from that source than it did in 2008. In addition, property values, which for years had been on a steady upward trajectory, have declined almost 10 percent since 2008.

Hix said public knowledge of such realities plus the city’s prior history of not raising taxes could help the city in stating its case.

“We don’t have a culture of raising taxes here. I believe that gives us a little more credibility for whatever decision (the council) makes,” Hix said.

Though he has not examined the budget proposal thoroughly yet, Hix said he was impressed with the effort that went into crafting it.

“I don’t believe (City Manager Ebel) took the easy way out. I believe it was a last resort recommendation,” Hix said. “I feel there is clear evidence that a lot of study and thought went into it.”

Mayor Carl Gerlach agreed, telling the council that staff “has already turned those couches upside down and done some shaking.”

Councilman John Skubal said the city cannot continue to put off street repairs.

“When we don’t maintain streets, that starts to show very, very fast,” Skubal said.

He noted that failure to repair a deteriorating street ultimately requires more expensive street replacement.

At the same time, he said he agonizes over what probably will need to be done.

“It’s real hard to look at a tax increase when your neighbors aren’t working,” he said.

Skubal and other council members also noted that recently stepped-up law enforcement efforts could be put in jeopardy unless public safety funding is preserved.

“Our city is changing and we need to change along with it,” Skubal said. “The last thing I want is for citizens to feel unsafe on our streets.”

Richard Collins, the council’s newest member, did not have to wait long to be presented with his first highly sensitive issue.

“I think I’m prepared to make the tough decisions that need to be made. It’s no secret that revenues are down. That’s not unique to Overland Park. If we explain to (residents) the situation, I believe they will support us,” Collins said.

The more veteran Hix said he is not sure how residents will react, but if the city effectively explains “what they get for their money … they might take another look and see it in terms of an investment.”

Read Full Post »