Prop 31 is a UN Agenda 21 Trojan Horse (Updated)

Russ Steele

Update (08-29-12, 1500): I watched the discussion on the NC/TV. All the public comment was against Prop 31 due to the inclusion of Agenda 21’s 3 E’s of sustainability having been appended in the Proposition.   Even Rich Ulery, NC Republican Committee, admitted that the issues needs to be re-evaluated by the Republican Proposition Committee in light of the local opposition, as the Republican have repudiated Agenda 21 in all contexts. The only one that could not see the Agenda 21 elephant in the room was Supervisor Beason. “My objection to Prop 31 has nothing to do with Agenda 21.”  According to Beason the County is already incorporating the 3 E’s in the budgeting process. In other words, we already have Agenda 21 planning goals built in the the current planning and budgeting process. Who knew?  I wonder if this could have been the result of County staff attending ICLIC training sessions? The other Supervisors saw some danger the voluntary planning becoming a future requirement, and Supervisor Olson said, “the camel under the tent flap” and recommended NO on Prop 31. 

What is Prop 31?  It would establish a two-year budget and set up pay-as-you-go rules to limit new spending unless legislators identify new funding. It would allows the governor to eliminate any program during a fiscal emergency. Gives communities leeway to override state rules.

However, it also contains some elements of Agenda 21, which are high lighted below:


SEC. 1. (a) Californians expect and require that local government entities publicly explain the purpose of expenditures and whether progress is being made toward their goals. Therefore…the adopted budget of each local government entity shall contain all of the following as they apply to the entity’s powers and duties:

A statement of how the budget will promote, as applicable to a local government entity’s functions, role, and locally-determined priorities, a prosperous economy, quality environment, and community equity

Article XI A. Section 5 (b) The State shall consider and determine how it can support, through financial and regulatory incentives, efforts by local government entities and representatives of the public to work together to address challenges and to resolve problems that local government entities have voluntarily and collaboratively determined are best addressed at the geographic scale of a region in order to advance a prosperous economy, quality environment, and community equity…”

Legislative Analyst’s Overview regarding effect on State and Local Government: Implementation costs: Potentially millions to tens of millions of dollars annually.  Effects of new requirements:  Cannot be predicted

Proposition 31 codifies the 3 E’s of Agenda 21/ Sustainable Development into the CA Constitution & law!  Communities will have to draw up plans and budgets to implement the three E’s Economy, Environment, Equity.

Who is funding Prop 31?

Who is the primary funder behind Proposition 31?  Nicolas Berggruen contributed $1,555,086.94 to Proposition 31.Berggruen, a dual American and German citizen, founded the Nicolas Berggruen Institute through which he aspires to develop and implement more effective systems of governance. Through the institute, he has launched several government reform projects including the 21st Century Council which is focused on global governance challenges, the Council for the Future of Europe, to support European integration and the Think Long Committee for California a bi-partisan effort focused on reforming California’s system of governance. The 21st Century Council was formed in 2011 to address gaps in global governance. [Berggruen information from Wikipedia]  Berggruen alos donated to California Forward.

Here is what Assemblyman Tim Donnelly has to say in a FlashReport Editorial PROP 31: THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS

“I urge the California Republican Party to reverse it’s position, and I urge every Californian to vote no on this confusing, misguided, and potentially destructive proposition.

The lesson to all of us is, when making a decision this important – read the fine print.”

This is an item on the Board of Supervisor Agenda tomorrow and needs your attention. they should recommend an NO vote on Prop 31 by the RCRC.   See Nevada County BOS Agenda Item #31

ACTION: Contact your supervisor and tell him NO on support for Prop 31.


About Russ Steele
Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.

36 Responses to Prop 31 is a UN Agenda 21 Trojan Horse (Updated)

  1. gjrebane says:

    Good post Russ, I intend on being at the Rood Center tomorrow. And there’s much more to be said about this Agenda21 Trojan horse. One thing I do propose is that the NC Republican Party repudiates this proposition.

  2. It is clear that the Republican’s did not read the fine print, or that they are totally clueless about Agenda 21 and the Sustainability cover story. Either way, it is very disturbing.

  3. benjaminemery says:

    Please explain to me this whole agenda 21 stuff? Although we disagree on political philosophy I appreciate your point of view, most of the time.

  4. Daryl Bryant says:

    D Bryant

    As usual it appears that our representative government is at work feeding we the sheep people sugar coated total control in the form of proposition 31. In Article XI a. section 5 b. Do we really need the state determining through financial and regulatory incentives how to support local governments. I have lost any confidence in California’s state Government especially our current legislatures success record. Do we want these folks adding more layers of bureaucracy regulation and finical burdens upon our broken backs. Please stop additional irresponsibility of tax and spend combined with more big brother Democrat and Republican control.

    Let us take our time and ponder the embedded systems within the body of Proposition 31. The three ideas or systems in question “prosperous economy, quality environment, and community equality”. Are these real systems or are they politically correct terms that shift like sand when a regime change occurs?

    Do the liberal and conservative factions in our country define “prosperous economy, quality environment, and community equity” in the same way?. These terms are much to complex to agree upon without hardy debate and careful examination. These three concepts are capable of being viewed from totally opposing view points. The Tea Party interpretation and the so called progressive left view points regarding definitions of a prosperous economy, quality environment and community equity will be as different as oil and water.

    We the people welcome less Government control, free markets and less taxation. However, the United Nations Agenda 21 one world government socialist ideas thrive on cradle to grave control, government regulation and higher taxes. It appears that Prop 31 is related to the same ideals and patterns Agenda 21 propose.

    Clarify me who will decide what a quality environment is. Will our self serving government leaders that are bought off by big money define for the citizens quality environment ? For example is it possible that our elected officials could decide a quality environment made up of genetic modified seed designed by Monsanto is the model we will follow. I frequently read news articles regarding Monsanto routinely suing farmers that plant open pollinated heirloom seed. Monsanto clams the open pollinated crops taint their genetically modified seed.

    What political faction will define community equality? According to our US Constitution the left the right the poor the rich all fall under the banner equality. However we see that political correctness always leaves some in society less equal that others. Sadly our society is flawed and has a built in cast system just as does all society’s. As voiced in the novel Animal Farm, “everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others”.

    The question remains, does prop 31 benefit the population as a whole or just a few bureaucrats at the top of the pyramid. Does it promote constitutional flexibility or freedom for We the People, or does it create more bureaucratic big brother control.

    In my humble opinion prop 31 terminology appears to be politically correct as well as socialist in it’s nature. Prop 31 seems to be reasonable in sections nevertheless is riddled with ambiguous smoke screens. Once prop 31 is interpreted by those in power and imposed upon the citizens we will suffer. California’s population is already taxed beyond reason and this proposition will add more bureaucratic demands upon each community.

    Are we to be duped once again by our Democrat and Republican representatives that vote on legislation prior to reading the fine print. Were is the call for a public debate that considers the long term effect of prop 31on our citizens now and in the future.

    Let us reason together regardless of political affiliations and study the UN Agenda 21 goals as we analyze the meaning of the same verbiage contained within prop 31.

  5. benjaminemery says:

    I read it and George’s last remark about a one world order is a bit behind the times. We have a one world order it is called WTO.

    Let me ask why are you so afraid of moving away from fossil fuels and reducing carbon emissions? I really don’t understand the fear behind your crusade against global warming/ climate change.

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      Het Russ, am I exhaling a carbon emission?

    • MikeL says:

      It’s not about wanting to get away from the use of fossil fuels as much is it is about using fraudulent junk science as a propaganda tool to convince scientifically illiterate people that they need to behave a certain way or they will destroy the planet. I for one welcome the use of alternate fuels but I really hate the BS associated with the whole Global warming climate change scam. I think you should be allowed to use wind and solar power to fuel your life but do you think you could leave me alone to use oil if I want too?

  6. benjaminemery says:

    Mike L,
    Thanks for the honest answer. I sympathize with your position but what you or I contribute is miniscule to the energy industry. Fossil fuel emissions are very toxic outside of the whole global warming/ climate change debate. I don’t think it is alright at the expense of everyone’s health to continue to spew toxic waste into the common air/ water/ we breath/ drink/ eat, especially in younger developing human beings. Mercury is one of the easiest to point and prove. Mercury becomes airborne as the coal is burned or directly enters into the watersheds through poor mining practices and eventually becomes methylmercury, which is then exposed to the food chain. I get what your saying but we don’t consume or extract fossil fuels in a vacuum.

  7. Arthur M. Day. says:

    And yet, while deaths from methylmercury are down in the noise level, more people die from cardiovascular and dietary self abuse, i.e. being overweight and out of shape, than all other causes combined.
    Being a veteran of life in the Los Angeles basin from the ’50s to the ’90s, I can assure you that airborne pollution in the U.S. is now at minimal levels.
    If you want to experience serious air pollution, you need to move to a Socialist country, like China.
    Agenda 21 is about creating a self anointed Aristocracy who are above the law, lording it over a peasantry who have no rights. All the rest is bafflegab.

  8. stevefrisch says:

    First and foremost, the above is not an accurate description of what happened at the BOS meeting. If one would like to actually see the meeting the link is here, and should be available as soon as it is uploaded after the meeting:

    The agenda item is number 31, so readers can move forward to the appropriate spot on the agenda based on looking at the agenda item number in the sub-titles.

    Second, Mr. Ulrey did not confirm that the item was not reviewed by the appropriate California Republican Party policy committee; he clearly stated that it was reviewed, and that the committee did not find a connection between the Proposition and Agenda 21. He clearly stated that the committee knew exactly what it was doing.

    Third, Mr. Beason did not say what Russ says he said–he said that the reporting requirements included in the Proposition were all things that the County is already doing. He did not say that the County is already “incorporating the 3E’s in the budgeting process”. There is a difference.

    For the trollers here, watch the video and decide for yourselves if you want to be associated with this craziness.

    • RL Crabb says:

      S’cuse me, but I was actually at the meeting and I heard Nate say he didn’t equate Prop 31 with Agenda 21. That’s fine by me. I still have a hard time believing those nimrods at the UN could impose any authority over anything. Ever seen the blue helmets in action? They spend most their time ducking.
      However, the nimrods in Sacramento are capable of almost anything, unless it has real reform written on it. The real problem here is multi-layered initiatives. Stick to the issue at hand and stop backloading them with “voluntary” regulatory bullshit..

      • stevefrisch says:

        I am sorry Bob, I should have been clearer, I agree he did say he did not equate Prop 31 with A 21, what I was referring to was that he did not say that the “the County is already incorporating the 3 E’s in the budgeting process.”

        Not that there is anything wrong with the 3E’s, after all don;t we all want a society that has a prosperous economy, quality environment and social equity for all?

  9. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr Emery: Correlation is NOT causation. The long term U.S. Gov. study of U.S. teenagers shows a strong increase in obesity, a small increase in caloric uptake, and a major drop in exercise.
    GMOphobia is a good illustration of the non-medievality of superstition.
    And would you care to comment on the non-existance of human deaths from methylmercury? Or anything else in my post?

    • benjaminemery says:

      Science is a slow and deliberate process and the studies are getting close to affirming HFCS is a major cause for the obesity and diabetic epidemic. The way it works is the body recognizes it as glucose and pumps the body full of insulin. The problem is the insulin doesn’t have the receptors for HFCS, which then creates the sensation of being hungry because the body is full of insulin. So we eat more.

      • MikeL says:

        It appears to me that you live in a fantasy world inhabited by boogie men and monsters under your bed along with irrational paranoia of outliers. The deaths from CH3Hg are nearly zero and the alarmism associated with global warming are unfounded by facts. You missed the point of what I said previously, namely that for you and people that share your way of thinking have no problem lying since you feel the ends justifies means.

      • stevefrisch says:

        Lets see Ben, you answer honestly, even politely praising Mike L. for his tone and concern, and he calls you a liar. And that behavior will be tolerated, probably celebrated, by everyone here. Fascinating.

  10. benjaminemery says:

    I don’t expect anything different but it is amazing how everything turns into name calling trying to spark a fight of some sort. Mercury is a serious issue and I didn’t realize unless it is directly causing deaths it isn’t a concern.

    Personally I think the difference is we know and we don’t have anything to prove to others. That is why we can have dialogue without the name calling and trying to belittle the other person individually.

    • Todd Juvinall says:

      Do you two lovelies read your own words? Apparently not. You two are a whirlwind of namecalling.

    • MikeL says:

      Hg is a concern and that is why I don’t eat tuna and other fish that accumulate Hg. Ben seems to be making Hg out to be this major killer when in fact it is not. Steve if you carefully read what I wrote you might determine that I did not call Ben a liar. I said he has no problem making stuff up in order to influence others to his way of thinking. Hence the ends justify the means.

      • stevefrisch says:

        I am not sure in what saying, “….for you and people that share your way of thinking have no problem lying since you feel the ends justifies means.” is not saying someone is a liar.

      • stevefrisch says:

        Ooops, that should read “in what world”. Sorry.

      • Todd Juvinall says:

        Sure it does. When a liberal lips are moving it is a lie. Been that way since Marx.

      • stevefrisch says:

        Must be nice to live in a world where everything is so black and white.

        I leave you today with this final stansa of Thomas Gray’s poem Ode on a Distant Prospect on Eton College:

        To each his sufferings: all are men,
        Condemn’d alike to groan—
        The tender for another’s pain,
        Th’ unfeeling for his own.
        Yet, ah! why should they know their fate,
        Since sorrow never comes too late,
        And happiness too swiftly flies?
        Thought would destroy their Paradise.
        No more;—where ignorance is bliss,
        ‘Tis folly to be wise.

      • Todd Juvinall says:

        SteveF, “black and white”? Are you being racial again?

  11. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery, how many people have died from mercury poisoning this year? Isn’t a signifigant death rate part of the definition of a ‘serious problem’?
    The benighted, fog bound swamp of self congratulation is all too obvious.

  12. benjaminemery says:

    Mike L and Art,
    I guess if you don’t see it, it must not be happening.

  13. benjaminemery says:

    Since this is a global issue here is a paper on
    Health impacts of domestic coal use in China
    Robert B. Finkelman*†, Harvey E. Belkin*, and Baoshan Zheng‡

  14. Dixon Cruickshank says:

    Since I’m very involved in Fisheries Managment in Fla – the majority of Mercury found in fish is naturally occuring – both freshwater and salt. Those larger fish do absorb a bit more as they are at the top of the food chain – nothing you can do about it – but you couldn’t stand to eat enough fish to hurt you – another Enviro straw man

    Now as far as your local issue, you guys need to learn an old term and lession from us southerners

    CARPETBAGGERS ———– just say’in

    they ain’t com’in just cause they like you

    • Russ says:


      Thanks for the insight on Mercury in fish.

      • benjaminemery says:

        Wouldn’t you say the fact that fish contamination with mercury being any kind of factor shows the levels mercury falling into 70% of the earth surface and over 95% of the entire earths water has to be gigantic? I am talking about a needle in a haystack kind of probabilities. Once again, if it isn’t your kids or someone you love then it isn’t an issue. It shows the difference in where we get our information as well. I looked up FL and they have a guidebook on the consumption of fish and mercury, I guess the state feels it is a bigger issue than Dixon.

  15. benjaminemery says:

    We are very familiar with the term carpetbagger around these parts, right guys.

    Get this, we have US congressional 4th district that is huge until next congress and then it changes with the redistricting. It takes around 2 hours plus to drive across it on a highway and 5 hours from north to south. Its located in the north east part of California. We have a career politician representative that grew up in So California, got term limited out of state legislator from So California (district over 450 miles south of ours), and now represents our district in US congress without ever living in our district. Talk about carpetbaggers.

  16. Dixon Cruickshank says:

    Ben your right as I stated it has been an enviro straw man for years, but we do have honest scientists down here and most of water borne Mercury leaches from the ground. We have very few other industrial sources or industry, yet we have it. Now this maybe different with other soil substrate but we have vast deposits of phosphate ore which is radioactive – but we don’t glow in the dark nor do the fish.

  17. Arthur M. Day. says:

    Mr. Emery, stress kills. You are shortening your life with a steady diet of groundless fears.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: