Strings That Lead To Control.

This is a cut and paste from New Hampshire Business Review about what I've reported on before. Namely, this Agenda 21 and efforts by the nine Regional Planning Commissions to advance this "Granite State Futures."

I think this is beyond scary. It's not about control either, that's already been decided.  The real concern here is what comes next. Name any government entity that ever stops implementing things like Granite State Futures, Agenda 21 and other reaching programs.

They don't stop.

And where exactly is the control? How did these nine Regional Planning Commissions arrive at the decision to accept the millions of dollars in federal grant programs to implement these plans?

Was it ever voted on? Who voted it in?

I'm really glad Rochester opted out. I'm surprised they were even allowed to do this. 

Perhaps there are consequences for their actions... 

Granite State Future faces outspoken opposition

To supporters, statewide planning effort presents a unique opportunity; to opponents, it’s Agenda 21

By Kathleen Callahan
A Manchester police officer and David Preece, executive director of the Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission, overlook a Granite State Future Listening session in Manchester.

A Manchester police officer and David Preece, executive director of the Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission, overlook a Granite State Future Listening session in Manchester.

By Kathleen Callahan

Is A Granite State Future -- a year-old statewide planning project currently being carried out by New Hampshire’s nine regional planning commissions -- actually a plot by the federal government to eventually take private property in New Hampshire?

That’s the viewpoint of some activists in the state who have attended meetings about Granite State Future around New Hampshire to voice their many issues with the project.

The opponents, many associated with the tea party, have a slew of concerns with the statewide planning project, which they say is a top-down federal program that has its roots in a decades-old United Nations sustainability plan called Agenda 21.

“I’ve been tracking it since September 2012. The more layers I peel back on it, the scarier it gets,” said Tim Carter, co-leader of the Lakes Region Tea Party, who has arguably emerged as Granite State Future’s most vocal opponent.

A Meredith resident, he has not just attended most of the Granite State Future listening workshops around the state, but has videotaped them as well. In fact, a cursory YouTube search turns up dozens of videos from Granite State Future meetings in various communities all over the state -- including meetings in Rochester, which, along with Salem, opted out of participation in the Granite State Future process altogether.

The very vocal opposition from certain members of the community has been somewhat surprising for all of the regional planning commissions, said Kerrie Dears, executive director of the Nashua Regional Planning Commission, which has taken the lead on Granite State Future.

“It wasn’t something that we anticipated,” she said. “From our perspective, we’re doing the work we’ve been doing for the last 50 years. That’s why we’re sort of puzzled why folks are so anti-planning, and honestly, I don’t know where they make the UN connection -- that’s sort of a leap that just isn’t there.”

At the core of the opposition to Granite State Future is its funding source: a multimillion-dollar grant from the federal government. Skeptics of Granite State Future see the money as something nefarious that ties New Hampshire’s future to the whims of the federal government.

“If there’s money, there’s strings attached always with the federal government, and that’s just the way it is,” said Lisa Gravel, a Manchester postal carrier who attended an April listening session on Granite State Future at Manchester Community College. “That’s how the federal government works.”

The planners and people behind Granite State Future say that the grant is just that -- a grant, which allows them to fulfill their missions by gaining as much public input into the planning process as possible.

Advisory plans