The One Bay Area Plan or Plan Bay Area is a 25 year plan that includes housing, transportation, and land use based on the requirements of California law SB375. The plan calls for massive centralized command and control on how Bay Area residents will live in the coming decades. In fact, elite bureaucrats actually dream about moving more than 200,000 people from the East Bay to San Francisco!
But a petition, sponsored by SFBay CAPR, has forced bureaucrats to finally acknowledge that, “Significant concerns exist about the legitimacy, impacts, and influence of Plan Bay Area.” See what Plan Bay Area is really about and how to stop it.
Plan Bay Area will force development of stack and pack housing along mass transit corridors. It proposes all communities have a government mandated mixture of income levels and housing prices. It would severely restrict automobile usage. Toll Roads will be everywhere, while increased spending will be used to create inefficient public transit that will cost billions in new taxes.
Concerned citizens, who have been registering their objections to the plan since public meetings started in April 2011, have been largely ignored until a petition drive, sponsored by SFBay CAPR, yielded over 1,000 signatures protesting the Plan. The sponsors of the Plan, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) can no longer white wash legitimate citizen concerns.
MTC’s admission of serious opposition to its plan for seizing Bay Area development in the coming years could end up being a serious understatement based on the revelation of a document recently discovered by a property rights watchdog in Napa.
The nine Bay Area counties impacted by Plan Bay Area include seven million people. Please understand how dangerous this centralized plan is: take a moment and read the words of Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in a May 17, 2010 memorandum to the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Heminger regretfully conceded that he lacked authority to implement draconian steps such as “moving 200,000 people, over and above current projections, in 2035 to San Francisco to better match jobs with workers; [or] alternatively, we remove a like number of people in several suburban counties that have much higher jobs/housing imbalances.”
These elitists lust for the kind of authority that would enable them to relocate citizens on a larger scale than the program that sent more than 110,000 Japanese-American citizens into relocation camps in 1942. Their motives, of course, are pure. Given the power they desire, they would move us, not into crowded barracks surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, but instead to dray high-density, “stack-and-pack” apartments in “projects” located in urban cores where we would be compelled to rely on public transit, bicycles, or our own two feet to move about.
‘Move or Remove’ – excuse me, but when did anyone vote for this let alone realize that this was a hidden agenda perpetrated in the name of meeting greenhouse gas targets mandated by SB 375?
Only the active involvement of citizens will stop the power grab of unelected bureaucrats like Steve Heminger. Here are three actions Bay Area citizens can take to help win this battle:
Go to our website www.bayarealiberty.org to learn more about Plan Bay Area and how to become involved.
Forward this information to friends and neighbors and urge them to make their voices heard.
Send us your ideas and suggestions on other actions we can take together to stop this insidious plan, sfinfo@proprights.org .
Bay Area Citizens must resist Move or Remove.
Bill Gram-Reefer is Editor & Publisher of Halfway To Concord, founded in 2004. Halfway To Concord is the leading online source for community-driven political news, events, and opinion for Contra Costa County and the San Francisco East Bay.
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
California law SB375 sounds like a clone of United Nations Agenda 21, a UN global plan adopted at the 1992 Rio de Janiero “Earth Summit.” Some 179 nations, including the U.S., have signed on to Agenda 21, which brands essentially all industrial civilization as “unsustainable.”
Google it, along with “Sustainable Development.” It’s pretty scary.
They say they don’t want to spend money to subsidize sewers and schools on the outer fringes, but must we resort to socialism? I’d rather have privatized trash pickup and water service and toll toads than deal with any form of socialist government planning!
Imposing housing density mandates on the general population in order to shift 200,000 East Bay residents to San Francisco with the intent of reducing the the growth in tranbay transit demand appears to be more costly and would certainly enegender far greater political opposition than simply inceasing BART’s peak transbay capacity. A more precise train separation control system would enable a doubling in peak transbay train frequency while simultaneously adhering to BART’s current train separation safety margins. No additional core system tunneling would be required although additional parallel elevated track between the Oakland Wye and the Transbay Tube could enhance system reliability.
In citing “moving 200,000 people” I believe Mr. Heminger was referring to moving people on transportation systems, and the need to increase public transport modes because the highways are already beyond capacity.
If you’re paranoid (obviously) about eminent domain and removing people from their homes, the best way to do it is to widen existing highways and freeways. This won’t happen because of A) SB-375 and greenhouse gas increases, and, B) the State cannot afford to buy hundreds of acres of prime urban real estate.
“Stack and pack” is so unimaginative. Surveys are showing that there is a huge demand among gen Y and millenials for urban housing. Studies show that there is already a sufficient inventory of detached, suburban homes and the upcoming demand is for denser, urban homes. If you need evidence, notice that San Francisco real estate prices mostly continued to increase while the market in the rest of the Bay Area tanked.
This whole “Agenda 21″ paranoia is being promoted by lobbyists and think tanks funded by Big Oil and the Koch Brothers. There’s nothing grassroots about it. In other words, you’re being played. You’re a tool.
I like the ‘toll roads’ idea though. Did you make that up?
MP
wow, mr. planner. do you work for a city, a county, or a state, or something?
If you’re pushing propaganda (obviously) for an agenda that spends untold billions of our (the wealth creators) money, you’re doing a heckuva job.
Don’t you want to cite several ‘anonymous sources’ to support meaningless studies that ‘show’ -uh, the people, really want this? Doesn’t everybody in their twenties like shiny objects and handheld whatnots and housing that reminds them of all the fun they had in the dorms. Hardly the kind of well-reasoned, mature individuals we would want speak for such an expenditure, eh? (Like they’d like to responsible for their choices.)
And what of those very honest statistics? Did the surveyors combine the 88% of NOT-very- likely to ever use respondents; with the 9% barely-likely, with the 2% highly-likely, in the official conclusion. Good luck finding the actual questions or raw data.
Oh, and thanksomuch for the condesending ad hominem attacks against anybody that raises questions about the process.
WC
Agenda 21 is REAL. It is funded by
Rothschilds and Rockefellers and it is based on Pantheism and written by Gorbachev and Strong – Read the Earth Charter – Fascist depopulation agenda.
UN and the World Bank OUT of US !
Thanks for all the information. This is real and if we let it, coming to your neighborhood soon.
John Goodwin from MTC here. Please note the July 19 joint meeting of MTC and the ABAG Executive Board will be held at 7 p.m. the Oakland Scottish Rite Center, 1547 Lakeside Drive, Oakland 94612.
The link provided in Ms. Steel’s post provides the correct address for the meeting, but the calendar of upcoming events on the left side of this page states, incorrectly, that the meeting is to be held in the MetroCenter Auditorium.
(510) 832-0819
http://www.scottrite.com
~INFO UPDATED, THANKS. BGR
Planning to have 200,000 more people live in SF in 25 years than when not planning it, is something different from moving 200,000 people from the East Bay to SF. Those 200,000 extra folks will be there in 25 years (as will many others), but the question is where they will be living. We can plan for that without moving the actual folks.
What I find amusing is that we could have had 200,000 people more in SF today had Muni been a smarter organization. So, yes, one point for you to complain about our governmental organizations. Often, economists are attracted to the private industry and do not do well in California governmental settings. Or, as is the case with Muni, the political reality of a single party in full control puts an unnatural limit on how many people can live and work in SF, because Muni is not based on what is smartest, but on what a few people of the same club decide.
It’s not that voting for the other party would help much; it’s the system of winners that we have here, instead of a system of representation. One in six SF people voted for Bush in 2004, but no Supervisor is a republican, while we have 11 Supervisors. Our ‘representatives’ are like basketball players, tall and taller. All people know that basketball players are not representative of the entire population. And so the political parties here do not have any real competition to fear; they are in control too much by themselves, and that’s the real problem. They need more competition.
A wee bit paranoid are we, Mimi?
Paranoid is what you get when you’re completely uninformed and don’t understand what the point of the plan is.