Happy Thanksgiving...

This year, not only a semi amusing photo to share with you, but also an important quote.

First the comic...

Can't wait to get our hands on the family turkey (currently in the brine).

Now for the quote...

Secure property rights are the key. When producers know their future products are safe from confiscation, they take risks and invest. But when they fear they will be deprived of the fruits of their labor, they will do as little as possible.

Prepare for more private property rights battles in Mohave County in the year ahead. May God be with you and your family on this important holiday.

And one more and this time a video....

It went down like this...

Last week the Arizona Corporation Committee approved Hualapai Valley Solar’s Certificate of Environmental Compatibility (CEC).

Good news -- bad news sort of thing here. I'll start with the bad, the ACC is requiring HVS to only use a water supply of effluent for its water needs. This probably means the project will be put on hold at this point because there is no effluent resources or means of transport of effluent available in the area. The City of Kingman and HVS have been engaging in talks about allowing HVS to use the effluent resources in Kingman, but another problem... it is likely that there isn't enough effluent being produced because the population is not great enough.

Gee, the good news... well the ACC approved the application.

Just as a reminder, the Arizona Corporation Commission is a '4th' branch of government in the state of Arizona. Most folks out in the outer area, the area of Arizona that doesn't make up Maricopa County, watch the ACC put the brakes on economic development in those outer areas. I'm working on getting some information of solar projects similar to the HVS method of energy production in the Maricopa areas just to see if, once again, the ACC screwed the chances for more economic development opportunities in Mohave County.

For now I'll leave you with the press release from HVS.

Arizona Corporation Commission approves Certificate of Environmental Compatibility for Hualapai Valley Solar

Phoenix – The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted to approve the Hualapai Valley Solar’s Certificate of Environmental Compatibility (CEC) on Wednesday, October 20th. The CEC, the final State approval required to begin construction, approves the project's power plant, interconnection, and transmission plans. The ACC expressed that there is a shift towards dry cooling in the Southwest USA and that wet cooled power plants are unlikely to get any more approvals. In its decision, the Commission found that the “Project is in the public interest because it aids the state in meeting the need for an adequate, economical, and reliable supply of electric power.”


From the outset, the solar plant was designed to use an evaporative cooling system supplied with reclaimed wastewater. The CEC also allows the company to use hybrid (water and air) cooling technology if sufficient reclaimed wastewater is not available. Hualapai Valley Solar and the city of Kingman are evaluating all possible sources of reclaimed wastewater for use by the project. Since a binding Memorandum of Understanding was signed in December 2009, the city and HVS have been working on a reclaimed water purchase agreement that would supply more than half of the water needs of the project from the city's upgraded Hilltop Wastewater Treatment Plant. The current plant treats approximately 1.5 million gallons per day of wastewater, an amount that is expected to rise over time as residents switch from septic tanks to the city sewer system. The agreement for the output of the Hilltop facility is expected to go before the City Council as early as November.

The Hualapai Valley Solar Project is a proposed 340MW parabolic trough power plant. The plant’s design incorporates 7 to 8 hours of additional output once the sun is down through the storage of heat in molten salt tanks during the day. It is located approximately 28 miles north of Kingman, Arizona, is sited on private land, and has firm transmission located a few miles from the site.

More links

havasunews.com

Inane comments from the water worry warts (again)

Don't have time to slice and dice all the rather stupid remarks that are being made by the folks that pretend to care about water in the Mohave County area.  But for craps and giggles here is one...

The original content found here at this link...

Posted: Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Article comment by: az mac

I am going to say most people here will not qualify for the jobs they will offer. Many of the jobs will be temporary. Now it comes down to the water they will use. I guess they are going to allow them all the water they want. Get ready for a big hike in water rates on top of what is already coming.
Mary Smith
You just may find your self living like they did in the 1800s. If all the taxes come about like planned then prices will go sky high and most will not be able to afford very much. More jobs will disappear. We all ready have over 60 million without jobs and 41 million on food stamps.

Yes this is about the solar plant deal that uses some water to make the thing work.

It is obvious that 'az mac' has no clue about the jobs that will be offered by the power plant -- either that or s/he thinks all of you in Mohave County, or nearly all of you, are idiots.  Barely any of you good people in the Kingman area could qualify for a job at the plant.  The water worry warts don't think very highly of their neighbors and it shows.  They are the most greedy and ill mannered people in the county.

Now on to the water use and again 'az mac' inserts foot into mouth.  The plant will own property, if the plant is ever allowed to be built.  In other words the plant will be an owner of private property in the state of Arizona and the county of Mohave.  Private property owners that have requested the state and other authorities for use of well water get to use all the water they want.  Let that one sink in folks.  There are NO meters on private wells in this area.  Nobody can tell a private property owner with a well that they are limited with how much water to use.  Yet here is a company that will move to Mohave County and agree to use a limited amount of water... thereby giving away some of their property rights.

I'd love to see the state threaten to put in meters on private wells -- as a staunch private property rights proponent I'd be against such a thing of course -- but I'd love to see some of the reactions when the water worry warts own rights are threatened.  And really folks, if the water levels were as bad as the people with zero data say it is, the state or the county would be installing water meters and limiting amounts of water private property owners use.

So big hikes in water rates are right around the corner because some solar plant will be drawing a limited water supply with authorization by the state and local governments??  Just once I'd love to see any one of these idiots back up their idiotic statements.  Again, if they didn't have scare tactics... they'd have nothing.

As for the rest of the remark made by 'az mac' to Mary Smith is concerned, yeah no one wants their taxes raised at the federal level at a time like this... but no one is going to live like it is the 1800's again (hey another scare tactic, wow).

But what do I know... I wouldn't qualify for a job at the plant.  Hmmm... that almost begs a challenge.  I just might have to get out the old resume and apply for a permanent job at the new plant (whenever it gets built).  I'll make a bet now that I can, in fact, get a job at the plant... and I'm a self described big dummy.

One thing for sure... the wells will run dry of water in this county way before the well of stupid asinine comments (like bats will choke to death on dust) from the water worry warts will.  So at least they got that going for them.

The big one...

So maybe you heard about it... it might be kind of a big deal.  Yep folks there is a killer asteroid on the way to earth right now and the estimated time of arrival is the year 2182.

So how does this affect the great folks here in Mohave County Arizona you might ask... I'll get to that in a minute.  First thing though the important bits from the linked article...

The asteroid, called 1999 RQ36, has a 1-in-1,000 chance of actually hitting the Earth at some point before the year 2200, but is most likely to hit us on 24th September 2182.

It was first discovered in 1999 and is more than 1,800 feet across. If an asteroid of this size hit the Earth it would cause widespread devastation and possible mass extinction.

Oh.  Still long odds I see.  Not as long as the other killer asteroid zooming around in space with a chance to give it to us real good in 2036 (a chance as in a one in 250,000 chance) but still.

Let's imagine that science was actually good enough today to be definitive about tomorrow and 1999 RQ36 is locked and loaded with a delivery date of 9/24/2182.  What would we (you or I or they or anyone) do??  I figure it this way.

1) It is the year 2010 right now a goodly number of folks are going to say that they won't be around for the show some 170 years from now so no big deal.  Fair.

2) Some folks will be very pessimistic and feel that nothing will be able to stop the impending collision.  They'll say this today -- maybe even on the Internet -- even though 170 years ago things like the Internet, computers, and space vehicles were impossible in that time.

3) Others will want to do something about the approaching menace.  These folks will begin a concept called problem solving.  Even though in the year 2010 the problem is not going to be felt by the people of this era, there will be people that will begin work on solutions -- knowing that it will be people in future generations that will actually solve the problem.  But the solutions have to start somewhere and for a impending problem as large as total destruction the sooner the better.

4) Still others will simply want to move.  Sure that may be tough to move off this planet right now, but it is an option.

These are just my opinions as to what people would do faced with an impending dire situation.  Because there is only a 1 in 1,000 chance that 1999 RQ36 is going to hit the planet some 170 years from now, I put myself in the first category above.  However I could see being part of the third or fourth category if there was something more definitive about the future.  There may be plenty more options and I won't argue those.  So why share this on a local blog??

Well, we here in the Kingman area of Mohave County are said to have some impending problem in the future.  That's right some of the very brightest and most 'enlightened' minds in the county have said the aquifers from which this community draws its water only has about 100 or 200 years worth of water left before it runs dry.  Yet these same folks haven't a care to actually do anything about changing the future -- well the future they represent anyway.

Just like in my example above the 'enlightened' want to do zilch about the problem putting them in the second category and to make matters worse, not allow anyone else to do anything about the impending problem either.  Think about it folks, anytime someone brings up the beginnings of any sort of possible solution to some far distant problem they scream that it is impossible.  These folks are simply the most greedy among us.  Sad that they cannot see the damage they are doing to the future.

Oh sure, they'll say they are protecting the future -- but they are the ones saying that the water will be all gone come a couple hundred years or so -- just how are they protecting the community for the kids and grandkids??  The grandkids will know that they may only have 50 to 100 years of water left, which will put them in the fourth category from my earlier asteroid example but they will no doubt have many different places to choose from to move to.  The grandkids might be able to find other solutions but their backs will be closer to the wall than if WE had begun to find solution for the problem... if the problem actually exists in the manner the 'enlightened' among us insist it does.

There is no future for Kingman if there is no water.  No matter how much we save today, tomorrow, and the next day we are still using water and will eventually use it all -- again if the 'enlightened' are as correct as they say they are.

The biggest problem for everyone on both sides of this perhaps impending problem is that as of today it doesn't feel like a problem.  Gonna get in a shower today, brush the teeth, make some lemonade, wash the car, run through the sprinklers, and even do some laundry.  All possible right now because for our community water is abundant TODAY.  We have more than we could use TODAY.

But what about tomorrow??  IF the problem is as big as it is represented by the 'enlightened' where are the folks that fall into the third category from my example above??  Maybe many of them have already exercised the fourth category or simply fall into the first one??

Local quote of the day...

From the comments at this link...

Posted: Friday, February 26, 2010
Article comment by: Allodial Title

This county is out of control. I moved here 2 years ago. Back east when I needed a permit to have more than allotted animals on my property, I went to the City office, paid my 25 dollars and was given a permit. But here in Mohave County, not so simple. You need a use permit, 300 plus dollars if you just want to own more than 4 dogs. 500 plus if you plan on breeding and selling, because now your commercial. They also then inform you that you must send a letter to your neighbors, and if they have a problem with it, you will be turned down. Now what the county doesn't tell you is that if they turn down your request, you will never see the money you put out just to ask permission. But they will tell you that you can try again in a year. They must think of the residents of this county as stupid. Why would I give them another 500 dollars, when they turned me down the first time? Our rights have so eroded that an unelected bureaucrat in the county government believes that he has the authority, the right and power to tell me if I can stick a shovel in my ground. Mohave County residents, it's time to take our land, and our constitutional right to own land back from this county.

'The Big Dummy' speaks... (no not me)...

No doubt that I read the KDMiner.com pages for the latest -- almost -- daily information about things happening in the Kingman area. It is the only such media outlet that is -- almost -- daily that puts their articles, opinions, etc. online for all to see. The content that is produced by the employees at the Miner is what it is... and since it has no competition, again online, it is the best available. However, to me the 'gold' I find at the KDMiner.com site comes from the content that the readers leave on either articles or opinion pieces.

I found a couple of comments that I wanted to further spotlight here on MOCO and they will appear below. Click here for the link to the letter to editor from Wednesday's edition. Go ahead and read the original letter for complete context where the following two posts are addressing. The title of the letter is 'Smart' people back at it again.

The two responses come from the same person who uses the moniker 'The Big Dummy', and here is the first one... with some of my thoughts along the way...

Posted: Thursday, January 28, 2010
Article comment by: The Big Dummy

Mr.Stultz and other naysayers,

You clearly don’t know much of anything but rumors about the Griffith power plant, power plants in general, electric distribution, or electric markets. Before you try to compare Griffith to any other power project you should know something about which you speak first.

For yours and other’s edification I’ll lay out some accurate information for you.

I love it so far... and it gets so much better.

About 25 people work at the Griffith plant and last time I talked with an acquaintance there all but one called Mohave County home. That’s about the number they said would work there when the project was proposed. Don’t believe it? Check the Miner archives. Unlike a solar plant, every one of Griffith’s workers need to be a skilled power plant technician. A lot of jobs at photovoltaic and concentrating solar plants are window washers that don’t need to know a lot nor do they get paid that well. I expect the core number of skilled plant operators at one of these new solar plants will be about the same as Griffith. In any case, Griffith never promised large numbers of permanent workers so why are you complaining?

So much good stuff here... I love the 'check the Miner archives' thing there -- which of course most folks against new development simply won't do. The part about have skilled technicians... yeppers... important in this kind of investment and endeavor. Having newly relocated higher skilled level employees will not be a bad thing for this community or it's tax base.

If you are still not happy that at least 24 of our own got great paying jobs at Griffith, something you do need to think about is how many local businesses are still in business, benefit, or have increased their staff because of Griffith? It is likely local repair shops like RAM Enterprises, Laron Engineering, Sky Hi crane, United Rental, and others are happy to have places like Griffith around. If more power plants get built in our area these businesses are likely to expand and new businesses start up. Power plants need skilled workers to support them during times of major unscheduled and scheduled repair and upgrades. The point, Mr. Stultz, is that large industries often create even more decent jobs indirectly.

Sounds exactly like economic development to me.

County water records show that since Griffith began operation in 2001 it has averaged under 1000 gpm; or under 1613 acre ft per year. That is well below what they could use. The plant has always paid all the County expenses in maintaining and operating the wells. The plant also checks the aquifer level every month and sends the data to the County and guess what, it’s all at the County Water Department for you to see and believe it or not the Sacramento Aquifer is not being sucked dry by Griffith. I can’t remember if the USGS survey identified localized water level depression in the Griffith well field but if they did, so you and other know, that phenomenon is common and normal around an active well. There are limits to those depressions to protect aquifers against subsidence; and yes Griffith also has to do aquifer subsidence surveys annually in accordance with ADEQ. Maybe Mohave Engineering is another company happy to have Griffith around? In light of this, I have no idea where you get the information to make such a claim about the aquifer.

The water worry warts make 'claims' all the time... yet they never have any proof to back up their claims of dire emergencies lying in wait because some new projects want to move into the area.

The first water contract was that the plant paid for the water they used plus an expensive hi demand charge under certain usage conditions. However, the plant had a large amount of the water system capacity locked up in that contract. Power plants have to secure enough water to run full capacity at any time so they have to lock up that capacity. Due to the plant’s low usage it looked like there was a lot of water available and the county wanted to sell it elsewhere, which Griffith, or any other power plant, wouldn’t allow. The water contract renegotiation was a sweet deal for the County. Whether Griffith runs or not the County gets paid for the full amount of water the plant needs available. The result, the County is making a lot more money off Griffith’s water contract without supplying any more than the usual amount they use. Instead of complaining that Mr. Walker made a bad first contract, why don’t you be glad he acted in the best interest of the County, at least in this case, in realizing the deal needed to be renegotiated?

A simple estimation of the County property taxes on Griffith show that the 10 million dollar investment the County made in infrastructure for the I-40 Industrial Corridor has been, or very nearly, paid for. If I recall, I think the tax assessment on Griffith alone is right around a million dollars per year, so those taxes alone have almost paid for the entire investment. In addition, we now have the prison, Unisouce’s peaker plant, and a block making plant operating out there now. Also, property tax assessments don’t change if a facility isn’t in production for a time. For such a smart guy I can’t believe you’d make such a stupid comment.

Again... economic development.

Unless you have some inside information you can’t honestly say the plant only runs when California needs the power. But even if they did, what do you care? Is it the tired old complaint that they use our water and sell the power to another state? If so, then you’d better start complaining about Mineral Park that’s been using 3000 gpm of your water for decades and selling your copper and other minerals to companies in other states for a profit. And by the way, their mine expansion is set to raise that water consumption to 6000 gpm. What do you feel about Arizona coal that went to Nevada to make power for them? Was that a problem for you? A smart guy like you surely knows that’s how industry works. Natural resources in one area are mined, cut, fished, or whatever and shipped somewhere else for processing, or manufacture, and sometimes to another place for distribution. Are you upset that rock quarries in our area shipping boulders and gravel to Las Vegas? They have to use some of our water for dust abatement so is that okay with you if the product ends up out of state? What about those poor people in Wyoming whose natural gas gets piped down here to Arizona to keep or homes warm? Would it be okay with you if they got upset that their un-renewable natural resources go out of State and they wanted to cut us off? So we take from others but are not willing to give? Is that how it is? How is using a little of our water for local projects that also benefit other States a problem?

And I'm just willing to bet that the original letter writer or any of the many water worry wart types that comment at the KDMiner.com site won't even try to attempt to answer any of the above questions... too bad too... would love to see the spin.

Let me ask you a more pertinent question. First let’s first assume that the Hualapai solar project will run at full capacity, 24/7, for 30 years and we assume the smallest estimated quantity of water in the Hualapai aquifer of 4 million acre feet and we assume no recharge for those 30 years. In this unrealistically high estimate only 3% of the aquifer would be used. You are all so very smart, I assume you’ve already done the calculations. My question is this, knowing how small a portion of the aquifer could be used what is the basis for opposing these plants based on water use?

Simply an incredibly smart and effective way to ask a similar question that I've been asking of the water worry warts... my question simply is 'when??'. Since they won't answer my easy question they won't attempt to answer this one either. The water worry warts HAVE NO DATA TO BACK UP THEIR ASSERTIONS.

Another fact about Griffith is that it is a merchant plant. There are merchant plants all over the United States and this time of year they, like Griffith, are sitting idle because it’s not real hot, not real cold, and manufacturing facilities are not running at full capacity. Merchant plants will, however, sometimes run even under these conditions when base load plants go off line for routine or emergency repairs. So even though a merchant plant may not be on line it serves as an important backup to increase the overall reliability of the US electric grid. The location of Griffith and the grid upgrades that they provided to our tristate area have also greatly enhanced the reliability of our local power distribution system – so Mr. Stultz’s power is less likely to go out from a single transmission line failure.

Judging from the unsubstantiated claims and unreasonable comparisons you made, Donald, it looks like you might want to reconsider who the big dummy really is.

All right, maybe 'The Big Dummy' didn't have to go there... but I'm not holding it against him/her. The water worry warts have said much worse about the pro development, pro property rights, and pro free enterprise folks in the Mohave County area.

So 'there appeared a second post in response to three attempts to take 'The Big Dummy' to task... the lame responses fail to impress and the follow up comment from 'The Big Dummy' shows why.

Posted: Saturday, January 30, 2010
Article comment by: The Big Dummy

Thank you for the support Mr. Stokes and Guess Who.

WES, maybe in all your rage you didn’t notice you are arguing with me? How funny. I’m glad you are exercising your rights and are politically involved. It’s more than most do. However, I don’t think you’ll be able to sway too many people to see things your way when your comments are laced with so much hate and anger. Your passion is powerful; make sure it’s always based in truth and not anger. Good luck with your effort!

Everyone else,

Ron Walker is not behind the moniker of the Big Dummy. I’m a Mohave County citizen that because of my educational background, where, and who I work with; I have experience in and access to much of this information first hand. All sources for what I say about taxes and Griffith water use is public record. I’d be a fool to lie when the numbers are available for anyone to see. I tried very hard to present nothing as biased or intentionally un-factual. If you are a lover or a hater of using water then the facts are going to seem biased, but it’s your personal bias. The facts, by definition, cannot be biased.

Whoever 'The Big Dummy' is... I want him or her to know that they are welcome to comment on this blog site anytime... I'd honor the wish to remain anonymous as well. This is great scissor use.

I’ve not read any HVS hydrology report or been to the public meetings. I used numbers published in the Miner and some common sense conservative assumptions and ran my own simple calculations that almost any of you could do as well. According to one of the No Names I guess they match pretty close to what HVS’s people came up with. I think that’s pretty cool! That means those HVS hydrology people aren’t fudging the numbers!

I've done the math as well... it was easy and it is very difficult to argue with.

If it weren’t for my associations and concern for repercussions I’d have used my real name, and I wish I could because I believe it would actually lend credence to my comments. I do hope my thorough commentary helps cut through the misinformed rants so my fellow citizens can make an informed decision about supporting or opposing these projects.

For years I've been trying to get more people to bring forth information that can be used in public... but for whatever reason the folks with a plethora of knowledge in this area just don't nearly as often as needed. I guess they have their reasons... but we are all missing out. Again, I'd let this person posting under the moniker of 'The Big Dummy' to post here at this site.

To Ron Walker; Clearly, some citizens hate your policies very much. I personally think you and the Board could do a better job in getting information to the citizenry, it would help clear up all that distrust so many people have. Think of the positive though, now you know how these folks really feel! I am offering you an apology for un-intentionally causing people to think The Big Dummy post was from you and for bringing such vitriol out against you. I am sorry about that.

Heh.

And finally...

To the Kingman Daily Miner,

Thank you for posting my comments. Could you PLEASE do us all a favor and publish the Griffith tax assessment, summary of the terms of their water contract with the County, and the record of their water usage? Since Griffith was built there has been so much misinformation about that place; some of it your fault. For the sanity of our County, please publish the records! It’s really too much for someone to put in as a letter to the editor. If you can’t pick on just them then how about a nice spreadsheet that shows ten year averages of tax payments, water use and cost, and # of employees of the top 25 property tax paying businesses in the County for the last 10 years? You have my thanks in advance.

Yeah... how 'bout it Miner??

Like I said before, you can find gold in the comments at the KDMiner.com. The above was such an example. Would love to see more folks like this get involved in the discussion.

Never was 'your backyard' NIMBY's

According to this mornings article at the KDMiner.com, the proposed solar plant near red lake received one more green light needed to begin development. Read more about that right here.

Of course that is great news if you are hopeful for positive economic development and/or simply believe in private property rights in Mohave County. However, I wanted to blog a bit about a different article that appeared the day before, this one actually. Below are my favorite parts...

KINGMAN - Two Mohave County residents who hoped to participate in Arizona Corporation Commission's Line Siting Committee's review of the Hualapai Valley Solar project Tuesday morning were disappointed.

HVS is asking for a certificate of environmental compatibility for its proposed 340-megawatt concentrated solar power plant to be built about 27 miles north of Kingman near Red Lake.

Residents Denise Bensusan and Susan Bayer filed to become interveners in the committee process in December. An intervener is allowed to call and cross-examine witnesses as well as present testimony to the commission.

You know that every now and then I have a beef with the editor of the Miner, he calls people fed up with federal waste and spending racists and gets his young writers in trouble with readers for ridiculous headlines, and once again another crappy headline. Notice above from the article is starts out by saying 'Two Mohave County residents'... yet the headline says 'Residents denied part in solar plant review'. The headline makes it sound as if ALL residents were denied the chance to speak in front of the Line Siting Committee... and I'm sure it was done on purpose.

Okay, back to the good stuff...

On Tuesday morning, both women were questioned as to why they wanted to become interveners.

Both said they were concerned about the impact the proposed solar plant would have on their community, the wildlife and the water table in the area.

"This is our neighborhood, our backyard," Bensusan said.

No... for the 1,000th time, it is NOT your backyard. You don't own it... never have -- never will.

I have to tell you, the reader, that over the years that the two women in this article have been appearing at government meetings to 'intervene' with private property rights in Mohave County I have been told many times about the property that one of them owns (not that I have ever cared one way or the other -- I've never written about it and won't here either). I will share only this, the location is out in unincorporated county area which likely means she has a well -- and the well does not have an imposition such as a meter on it -- which likely means she has rights to the water (from some aquifer) under her land. Yet here she always is, telling other private property owners what they can and can't do... yes of course it is silly.

Once again, unless your metes and bounds happen across the particular 4,000 acres or so in question where the solar field will be located -- AND -- your name is on that legal description... IT IS NOT IN YOUR BACKYARD!!

Committee member Gregg Houtz asked if both women had participated in the approval process at the county level.

Both said they had, but they felt that their voices were not heard.

Priceless... oh their voices are always heard, but there is a difference between hearing and listening.

Committee member Barry Wong made a motion to approve intervener status for the two residents. The motion failed for the lack of a second.

Chairman John Foreman told Bensusan and Bayer that because the motion failed, they would not be able to act as interveners, but they would be allowed to testify before the committee at a later time.

Again headline writer at the Miner... notice 'two residents'.

Also... I wish I was there for those precious moments.

"I feel that eliminating both of us is defeating the meaning of the (line siting) process. The community has a lot to say about what's happening in their neighborhood," Bensusan said.

Since when have these two women been considered the community?? What have they done and accomplished to earn the right to speak for the community?? Sure, I'll always support their right to speak for themselves (I love the entertainment), but dern it I'm tired of them pretending to speak for something more than their imagination.

last one...

"You have not been eliminated from this process," Foreman said. The two residents would have the opportunity to submit comments and evidence into the record for consideration by the committee, he said.

The committee has had previous experiences with residents wanting to act as interveners; some have been able to act as interveners very well, others have not, he said.

And the committee spoke to which category these two would have fallen.

See folks, this is the type of stuff that I have come to miss about being in Mohave County on a more regular basis. I used to be sarcastic in promoting these events as entertainment, saying that for the money it was the best form of entertainment (at least in Kingman) around. But basically '/sarcasm off' these days as this here is good entertainment. For realzzzz!!

Next step for the HVS solar project is a date in March with the Arizona Corporation Commission. Hopefully the lights will remain green along the way. Respecting private property rights and expanding the tax base in Mohave County will pay off for the community, no I'm not speaking for the community when I say that... just a prediction.

The local community organizers...

I received the following email that I'll share, my style (think scissors of course). The email comes from one of the anti private property rights loons so already you know the email is a waste of your time, but let me entertain you for a bit (it has been awhile).

Dear Friends and Fellow Concerned Citizens,

We (a group of concerned citizens) have organized a PRIVATE brainstorming session on January 6th, 2010, 2:00 p.m. till 5:00 p.m. in the big room at the Kingman Public Library located at 3269 N. Burbank Street, Kingman, AZ.

The intent is to review and produce credible OPPOSITION presentations to the Arizona Corporation Commission's (ACC) Line Siting Committees Hearing concerning the "proposed " Hualapai Valley Solar "WET-COOLED" parabolic trough solar power plant. The hearing is being held at The Hampton Inn and Suites, 1791 Sycamore Avenue, Kingman AZ. and shall begin on Tuesday, January 12, 2010, at 9:30 a.m. and continue on Wednesday, January 13, 2010, at 9:30 a.m., and, if necessary, Thursday, January 14, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.. The hearing will adjourn at approximately 5:OO p.m. on each day. Additional hearings, if necessary, will be noticed on the Project and Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) websites. https://edocket.azcc.gov/ plug in docket # 09-0541-00151 to view documents.

So far no big deal as far as I can see. I even sort of admire the water worry warts here because they realize they need to appeal to the majority of local folks either not on their side to begin with, or haven't been paying much attention in the first place. I believe it is the latter the water worry warts are hoping to deceive... I mean reach out to. More...

Organizing a structured and thorough OPPOSITION to the proposed "wet-cooled" Hualapai Valley Solar Plant's ACC application is imperative to the future of Mohave County. If we collectively assimilate organized and factual science into our presentations we can be assured of positive results.

And here is where it all falls apart for these darlings. They have no factual science to use in their presentations, never have -- never will.

But I do love the 'collectively assimilate' usage... I figured all along that the water worry warts were part of the Borg all along... and sadly if locals do not wake up to their tactics, resistance will be futile.

I hope someone on the good guys side attends this meeting... just for the laughs mostly. I'd love to see the lies... errr... I mean factual science they intend to use to dupe the ACC.

Through joint efforts we can also assist others (citizens, neighbors, friends, families, associates etc.) in assuring their comments are recorded appropriately and given the attention that it deserves which will make a positive impact on these very important decisions being made by ACC.

Now, in all seriousness, I can admire the effort the water worry warts are taking to 'teach' the folks how to lie... errr... make a case that there is no water left in Mohave County. And in Arizona, if they tug at the right heart strings of the sitting ACC members just right, they will get their wish to further erode private property rights and see to it that less positive economic activity is ushered in to the area.

Property rights and free enterprise -- more threatened in Mohave County than the supply of water. That's a fact.

We are sending you this "personal invitation" but please feel free to invite like minded friends and associates as well. This is an OPPOSITION effort to the project so only those OPPOSING the "wet-cooled" solar project will be welcomed to participate.

The citizens invited to participate in this session are some of the brightest and most independent minds in Mohave County! Thank you in advance for caring about your community enough to speak out in defense of the same!

Obviously I did not get a 'personal invitation' to this event, chances are if you are reading about this community organizing event here on this site for the first time -- you didn't get personally invited either. But... that doesn't mean you can't attend, right??

I honestly wish I could attend this meeting on January 6th from 2:00pm to 5:00pm at the Kingman library on Burbank (I'm guessing either the room a the library wasn't available after normal working hours or could it really be that all the 'brightest and independent minds in Mohave County' are retired or unemployed).

If you are concerned with private property rights and free enterprise and now plan to attend, I ask that you be nice and respectful in any interactions you might have with the water worry warts. If anything ask easy questions (like 'when??') and listen to their answers. But mostly, I urge everyone to be courteous and respectful (even though you would not get the same in return if the tables were turned).

Golden Valley Ahead of Its Time?

Recently I have been involved with the Golden Valley Chamber of Commerce, which is non-profit and remains in operation by the commitment of its volunteers. It's seen its ups and downs over the past 26 years, but it has weathered and seasoned into its own hallmark. When I first moved to Arizona in 1997 the 'Chamber didn't have a building of its own and operated partially out of Ed Bruce's office up by the (soon to re-open) Ocotillo on Hwy 68. Even then, the 'Chamber was where newcomers got their info and residents stated their communal concerns. Preserving the rural lifestyle of Golden Valley has long been a struggle and has led to many rigorous conversations regarding growth, water availability and planning. The 'Chamber of course has remained neutral, not taking an official position one way or the other politically while offering as much information as available to the community.

Long before "Climate Change", "Global Warming", "sustainability" and other catch phrases of the day evolved into the latest used vernacular for "being green", the Golden Valley Area Plan Committee valued their goals of preserving their lifestyle enough to have it stated in the executive summary:"Guard the individual’s property rights, quality of life and the environment in this rural community. Obtain reasonable development density and open-space which will remain non-intrusive on the neighborhood. Look for and support commercial and industrial development that is environmentally sensitive, offers quality employment, provides for the needs of the community and increases the tax base. Develop healthy, uncluttered neighborhoods for all that own property and live within the community. Enhance public safety infrastructure and opportunities for family oriented activities. Nourish the quiet enjoyment, scenic views, and night sky that make this a wonderful environment for the entire community.
(see: http://resource.co.mohave.az.us/File/PlanningAndZoning/GVAP.pdf pg. 2)

Finding commercial and industrial development that is environmentally sensitive, while offering quality employment and providing for the needs of the community while increasing the tax base has been a challenge over the past 35 years or so since the plan was adopted, but the times are rapidly changing. Seems that suddenly Golden Valley is more politically correct than once assumed. The growth controversies, water availabilities and economic development challenges may soon find themselves in an era of resolution and the Golden Valley Chamber of Commerce is taking its position of being the conduit of available information as a community oriented service for the 'Valley once again.

Hopefully most of you saw The Daily Miner this week with its highlight on Bobbi Case, the Golden Valley Chamber of Commerce President on the front page.

(see: http://kingmandailyminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=34949&TM=45650.53)

Mohave County has long searched and struggled to secure economic development that would perpetuate a stable and strong economic base. During the past few years, our I40 Industrial Corridor has seen its power source improved to actually support a manufacturing base to attract developers. Water availability issues are being worked on continuously and as expeditiously as possible to insure that there is water and service to support the Corridor. Mohave Community College and the JTED vocational courses are being quickly reviewed and modified to insure that we will have an available skilled work force to strengthen our "draw" to industry. We even have solar plants and the biodiesal plant approved with a new E-zone. So the next question should be as Bobbi poised, "Why couldn't we manufacture some of those things (solar panels and wind turbines or support equipment) here?" It may not have been the specific conception of the Golden Valley Area Plan Committee all those years ago when they initiated and approved the area plan, but Mohave County is desirable for the upcoming industrial age; renewable, sustainable...environmentally sensitive and very economically sound with plenty of tax revenue generating potential. And Golden Valley is strategically located to benefit.

The question that seems to remain unanswered is if Golden Valley's rural lifestyle can still be genuinely preserved along the way. Will the quiet enjoyment of the property owners along with their water rights, their quality of life be sacrificed or will the Golden Valley Area Plan be the sustaining force that not only encourages the current development d' jour but meets the original intent of its planning committee. Will Golden Valley remain a sleeper community en route between Kingman, AZ and Laughlin, NV or could it possibly be the model for rural communities facing similar issues across the nation? Who would have thought that a group of local people could have been so progressive 35 years ago before "Global Warming"/ "Climate Change", and to think, they were and still are, all volunteers. Volunteers and community service, even the participation has been conceptually "green".

Property rights vs. water...

Local governmental decisions are expected tomorrow on the two proposed solar plants in Mohave County. Here is a link to a nice little preview of the county supervisor meeting, and a blurb worth noting...

If the Board approves the amendments, both solar companies will still have to get all of the necessary federal and state permits before they can start construction.

See folks, it is not the end tomorrow... for neither side... whichever side you may be on.

I'm simply on the side of the property owner and I feel that the local government should respect private property rights to the very last degree. The decision the supervisors make will have much less to do about water than property rights.

UPDATED:

According to the writing of Donna Crouse in the comments below... both proposed solar projects passed the Mohave County Board of Supervisors at today's meeting. Thanks so much Donna for the update.

With headlines like these...

It's funny when the KDMiner editor gets all uppity about what is best for the community and then turns around and offers up the following headline...

Angry bikers to converge on Kingman

Just a crappy headline in so many ways.

However, the article itself is certainly worth a read. I even see some concerns for private property rights issues in this deal. From the article...

Deborah Barry, owner of Mad Dog's, said she instituted a "no colors" policy more than a month ago because of the surveillance being conducted by police in her parking lot. Because the bikers were being watched and photographed, they were less likely to drink, which led to a drop in revenue, and ultimately, the ban on colors, she said.

Barry said she was never threatened to have her liquor license revoked if she didn't ban colors.

Look, I don't know enough about motorcycle clubs... I don't drink at bars with any sort of frequency... or even know a dern thing about motorcycles for that matter -- but I'm siding with the motorcycle club chairman from the article and proprietors of private establishments if indeed it is true that some level of government is hanging the threat of a state liquor license against a property owner if they don't institute some policy that isn't even a law passed by the people.

It is becoming clear that it is time to remember our rights... and more importantly to protect them.

But some good news in defiance to the headline...

Ray said up to 2,000 riders could roll into Kingman by Saturday. He said he was aware of a couple of groups of more than 400 riders coming from Phoenix.

Ray said the riders have been invited to take part in the Veteran's Day parade in North Kingman Saturday morning. The parade will begin at 11 a.m. at the corner of North Bond Street and Northern Avenue.

Too bad for the city of Kingman though I guess that the newly voted on increase in hotel room rates won't be in effect for the visit. Maybe the 'angry bikers' won't be so angry when they find out they'll save a buck or two.

Looks like an interesting book...

NIMBY Wars...

Solar plant discussions part deux...

Just a reminder that the Mohave County Planning and Zoning Commission will continue the meetings on the two proposed solar power plants tomorrow September 16th at 10:00am at the county administration building on Beale.

I was not there last week and haven't watched the video of the meeting online or otherwise. Judging from the articles published so far, it sounds like only the Albiassa owned plant made it to the public discussion. I am more interested in the Hualapai Valley Solar project (the one near the Red Lake area) as they are the group talking about using waste water produced by the residents in the Kingman area. I see it as a smarter way to use the 'precious' resource rather than allowing it to simply evaporate away after one use.

So if you are in the area, stop by and check out this meeting. Feel free to give some updates in the comments, share with everyone your take.

As a reminder of what went down at last weeks meeting, my good friend Dave Hawkins sent me the following article that will appear in this weeks Standard. It is posted below all italicized and all that.


Article provided by Dave Hawkins

Consideration of requests related to proposed development of a major solar power facility southeast of Kingman featured plenty of familiar debate between those who support and oppose the project. But discussion at the September 9 meeting of the Mohave County Planning and Zoning Commission also included exchanges between a couple Commission members and Mike Horner, the Litchfield Park resident who owns the land where the 200-megawatt AlbiasaCorp. facility would be built and operated.

Member Mehdi Azarmi said the operation's consumption of groundwater has been the key issue of concern all along and that project officials need to be more specific and factual in that arena. Azarmi and Commissioner Carl Flusche said varying numbers keep surfacing in discussions.

``You gotta (sic) start being up-front and straight shooters with the people because otherwise you're not going to get the results that you want," Flusche said.

Horner responded that groundwater consumption was forecast between 1,000 and 4,000 acre-feet per year when the project was initially announced. He said engineering and design analysis has refined that figure to a current consumption expectation of 2,275 acre-feet per year.

Flusche said Commission members received e-mail and other communication from citizens who complained they didn't get straight answers during the series of public information meetings that project officials held in previous months. Horner said the complaints come from critics who can't reasonably consider the merits of the project.

``The data that was given at some of our meetings was not the data that some of the opponents were looking for and that's probably the reason that they blew up your phones or sent you 15 e-mails," Horner said. ``Anybody who knows me knows I'm probably more direct than courteous. I'm very direct and if I know it I will tell you what it is, and if I don't I'll tell you I don't know, but I'll find out. I don't come to these meetings to try to pull the wool over anybody's eyes."

Project critics, as they have whenever the solar facility has been the subject of a public meeting, spoke critically of use of technology that will consume groundwater. They repeated their concern that the water is consumed locally to generate power that will be sold elsewhere to the highest bidder.

Project officials and their supporters repeated their point that the power plant will serve as a stimulus to the local economy and take a necessary progressive step forward as the nation turns to cleaner energy production and the need to wean itself of its foreign oil dependance. They again noted the 1,000 jobs that would be provided during project construction and the 100-plus people who would be put to work to run the facility.

The discussion gobbled up about two hours, and the Commission adjourned the meeting without voting on Albiassa matters or other requests related to the larger Hualapai Valley Solar facility proposed north of Kingman. Both projects were to come back before the Commission in a continued hearing scheduled September 16.

(Look to future editions of the Standard for continued coverage of the solar power project proposals)

News Update re: proposed biofuels plant in Kingman (updated)

Earlier today the Mohave County Planning and Zoning Commission approved item 13A on the agenda; a minor amendment to the Mohave County general plan.

Right now, I guess, the meeting continues to hear item number 13B; a zoning use permit for the same project.

I was there this morning for the public input on item number 13A. I was there last week as well and I must commend everyone that spoke either for or against the issue. While I am biased on this issue (in the 'for' category), I think both sides did well in front of the commission.

While I was not able to stay for this afternoons proceedings, maybe someone that is there will provide an update on the commission's findings when the meeting is over. Please comment below, or if you have recently joined the writing staff here at MOCO -- blog about it in a new post.

A good day for property rights in Mohave County and Arizona today. More to come.

Update:

County P&Z also approved the other item on the agenda yesterday. Here is more on what took place yesterday from the KDMiner.com site. Please be sure to read the comments. Good stuff.

Biofuel plant county meeting, part II

A friendly reminder that part two of the county P&Z meeting will be held tomorrow starting at 10:00am at the county building... subject matter is on the biofuels plant. Come on down and support private property rights, lend your voice to the discussion. If you are having difficulty remembering what transpired last week, here is an article given to me by Dave Hawkins that will appear in The Standard later this week.

Pro Growth Swell


Energy and expression in support of growth and development was clearly more evident at an August 12 meeting during which the Mohave County Planning and Zoning Commission tabled action on requests related to a biodiesel facility proposed about 20 miles north of Kingman.

Voices of opposition in recent months have dominated public hearings and meetings regarding billion-dollar-plus solar power projects and the $20-million dollar biodiesel plant that Sun West Biofuels LLC wants to build on a 15 1/2-acre site just outside the Route 66 community of Valle Vista. Mayor John Salem, City Council member Robin Gordon and a number of other Kingman area residents pushed a different point view, telling the County Commission that employment and other economic benefits must be weighed in the debate.

``I realize that there's only about 20 jobs that may come from this (biodiesel plant) but the reality is, as you all know, is this is just really the tip of the spear of an enormous amount of green development that's going to happen here in Mohave County," Ken Herskind told the Commission. ``We have an opportunity here to either open our door for business and opportunity for our citizens or to slam it shut. There's billions of dollars of development literally on our doorstep."

Justin Chambers said he's also tired of the anti-development attitude.

``I come to these meetings and time and time again I see the same people opposing anything that will bring growth to town," Chambers said. ``People my age have families to support and it's not fair what you guys are doing to us here. We don't have pensions and social security to rely on."

Cherish Sammeli added that young adults are leaving the area in pursuit of employment.

``My age demographic is slowly disappearing in this community," Sameli said. ``There are a lack of jobs, people are forced to relocate and there are not enough job opportunities available to choose from."

A number of Valle Vista residents hammered home their point that they are not opposed to growth or development and have no issue with biodiesel production. They said they mostly oppose the proposed location of the facility.

They said they were concerned about dangerous chemicals that would be used in the operation and argued the plant should be built at either the Kingman Airport Industrial Park or somewhere in the I-40 corridor in the Yucca area.

``The people who are for this project aren't going to live anywhere near this," one Valle Vista woman said. ``The ones who really care about their neighborhood in Valle Vista don't want the project because of the possibility of fire and the possibility of explosion."

Project Manager Rick Neal reiterated his position that the biodiesel plant will be safe, green and clean.

``There will be no hazardous waste of any kind. We will use no water in our production," Neal said. ``This is a closed loop system. We will be emitting no pollutants or smell into the atmosphere."

Several Valle Vista residents complained they moved into a rural setting to gain distance from industry and didn't want such businesses encroaching upon them. 50-year Kingman resident Shay Givans argued that Neal has property rights as well, and should be free to develop his land provided he's in compliance with all rules and regulations.

Richard Basinger, attorney for the Valle Vista Property Owners Association, countered that Neal currently enjoys no property right beyond the agricultural designation afforded under the general plan. Basinger urged Commission rejection of the request to amend the general plan to allow the biodiesel plant under a heavy manufacturing designation.

Other plant opponents, with support from Commission members Bill Abbott and Carl Flusche, expressed worry that the requested general plan amendment could open the floodgates for less desirable heavy industries.

``If you allow this, it's going to get a foothold and it will continue and the footprint will get a lot larger," agreed Frank Lee.

Bob Taylor, a civil division deputy county attorney, clarified that land use designations under a plan amendment do not change underlying zoning. Other heavy industrial projects, he said, would require additional zone changes or Zoning Use Permits (ZUP) for development and operation.

Commission and county staff members provided some comment but statements from 30 citizens dominated the 90-minute long public hearing. The Commission did not vote on the plan amendment or the ZUP sought for the biodiesel facility.

The matters will be considered during a special August 19 meeting of the Commission.

More property rights travesty...

The following bits and pieces that I'm cutting from this opinion piece in many ways mirror what has and what could be happening here in the Kingman area in regards to development and property rights. Without further delay I jump right into this one...

Arizona property owners need protection
By Nick Dranias
Special to the Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 08.10.2009

Tucson developer Mike Goodman did everything right. But that didn't stop Tucson bureaucrats from pulling the rug out from underneath him and his construction project.

He bought land from the city, fully disclosed his plans to develop student housing to city officials, secured building permits and began building student housing in accordance with his approved permits and plans.

So far so good...

But when community groups objected to mini-dorms being built within walking distance to the University of Arizona because they said it would negatively impact the neighborhood, Tucson's zoning administrator revoked his building permits.

City officials then tried to force Goodman through a newly invented and more complicated project approval process, all the while refusing to allow him to protect his unfinished construction.

And boom goes the dynamite. Could almost be an opinion piece about attempts for development by landowners right here in Kingman over the last few years. I'm not saying that everything here in Kingman went down in the exact same fashion, but the fundamentals are certainly there.

A developer with less courage probably would have considered the odds too heavily stacked against him and just given up. Instead, Goodman chose to fight. He ultimately received a court ruling that found "no valid legal basis for the Zoning Administrator's revocation of Goodman's permits."

I'm pleased for Mr. Goodman but as you will see...

But the damage had been done. Goodman's existing construction—foundation, framing, mechanical and electrical systems—had been exposed to the elements for nearly two years. Vandals had left their scars on the project, too. Extensive repairs had to be made. Goodman incurred attorneys' fees in excess of $100,000 and lost more than $500,000 in rental income.

It is this sort of stuff that has captured my interest. It certainly isn't an effort to defeat people of advanced years. Like I've said before, property rights do not discriminate against anyone... race, creed, or age.

Just a bit more from this opinion piece...

One of those rights is the right to use and enjoy your property without micromanagement from city officials. No one denies that regulations protecting public health and safety are important, but when regulations are put in place simply to indulge the whims of special interests it violates private property rights.

Local governments must be restrained from creating rules and regulations aimed at keeping people like Mike Goodman from using their property in ways they have a legal right to do.

Right now in Mohave County we have our special interest groups lobbying the local governments to limit private property rights (the NIMBY's and the water worry warts).

The author of the opinion piece is the director of constitutional studies at the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, a conservative advocacy organization. You will find a link on this web page from the Goldwater Institute that takes you to a long report in PDF form titled A New Charter for American Cities: 10 Rights to Restrain Government and Protect Freedom. It is a heck of a read, if you have the time. Below is a bit that is found on page 29 of that report.

Replace Zoning with Privately Enforced Restrictive Covenants

The unvarnished truth is that just about any zoning law functions as a vehicle for politics to dominate property rights. This is because the primary criteria for zoning decisions typically boil down to: “How many people favor and how many oppose? Who supports the zoning of the site and who objects to it?” As a result,“when the final vote comes, most if not all legislators will vote for reasons that have no relationship to maximizing production, satisfying consumer demand, maintaining property rights and values or planning soundly.” Not surprisingly, studies of Philadelphia, Lexington, Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles have shown “control of property through zoning is more chaotic than it is orderly.”

It tends to get chaotic when one group demands the rights to another persons property for nothing in regards to a fair exchange. It has been happening right here in Kingman and the damage has been done. Hopefully the damage can be 'undone', but it won't be unless more voices start demanded more respect for property rights we are entitled to by law.

Local property rights still under assault, but...

I just returned from today's Mohave County Planning and Zoning meeting where the hot topic was the proposed biofuel plant east of Kingman and over a mile away from any major residential areas.

The county meeting room was fairly full and I have to say that there were more folks opposed to the biofuel plant in attendance, not that it really matters. Many voices were still heard that favored the needed changes to allow the project to move forward.

Voices included the mayor of Kingman, John Salem, who stood up for needed growth that promises more opportunity locally. His words offered real leadership to many, his concerns are about moving the local economy forward. Another elected leader also spoke up for new opportunities like the biofuel plant that promise more jobs and expansion of the tax base and I was certainly glad to hear those comments from Kingman City Councilwoman Robin Gordon.

Kingman certainly needs leaders and it was inspiring to see two such leaders speak up for all in the area that are hopeful for a better future.

The central arguments against the biofuel plant were the potential danger of a fire or explosion and simply the NIMBY element. One intelligent woman that spoke in opposition admitted that she was not against biofuel plants and even mentioned that they would be welcome in Mohave County... just not where the one that is proposed is located. Classic NIMBY.

What I witnessed was a group of people demanding the P&Z commission to deny the rights of another property owner. Of course that is as un-American as it can get.

I have a possible solution for the folks out in the Valle Vista area that are opposed to the plant and who wish to take the rights of the property owner in question that intends to build the biofuel plant. Simply write a letter of intent to purchase Mr. Neal's property for agreed to value so he can then purchase land at another location (complete with a one mile rail spur that is needed for the project) with the already correct zoning. Then simply raise the HOA dues by $1000 a year or so for a couple of years so that the money can be collected to pay Mr. Neal for not only his property, but the rights to his property.

Yeah, it's highly doubtful that those that will be asking the government to take away the property rights of an individual away won't want to actually pay for those rights.

Proponents of the biofuel plant were often interrupted as they were trying to speak in front of the commissioners, the commission chair had to tap the gavel many times throughout this mornings public meeting. So not only were private property rights disrespected but so was the right to speak.

I hope moving forward that more proponents for new opportunity, job growth, and community health come out to support the issue when it appears before the Board of Supervisors. Please remember to be courteous to those that may oppose your views, even as they don't offer the same respect.

This is a good fight, a fair one, and now more are joining the side that protects the rights of ALL property owners. Good days ahead.

I did not stick around for the decisions made by the commissioners. This issue will be in front of the voter elected Board of Supervisors soon where decisions are more formal.

Related:

Another voter elected leader chimed in on the issue of fairness this morning in an article at the KDMiner.com here.

Property rights threatened again... (Shocked?? Nope)

When you read this here article from the SunSentinel.com (think Florida) you may find that you are initially thinking, "hey, that sounds like an okay idea." I mean I did for like a nanosecond.

It appears that the federal government is considering using vacant foreclosed homes as temporary shelter for victims of hurricanes, if needed, this upcoming storm season.

Here are some bits from the article...

If a major hurricane strikes Florida, authorities may take advantage of the foreclosure crisis to place displaced residents in vacant homes seized by banks.

Ruben Almaguer, interim director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, has proposed that the Federal Emergency Management Agency use foreclosed homes — which are particularly abundant in this state — as an alternative to placing people in trailers or scattering them around the country.

"Historically, no one has ever used foreclosed properties," Almaguer said. "If they have 1,000 foreclosed properties in the area, why not?

Why not?? For starters the property does not belong to the federal government. Foreclosed properties are still private property, and at least for now there is a bundle of rights that adhere to the owners of property.

"It may be cheaper, especially if they have to drive a trailer down from Kansas. The cost of driving that down, setting it up, now they've got to connect water, sewer, electricity, get permits pulled for it. That's resolved when you already have in place a fixed property. And what happens a month later when the second hurricane comes through the same area? Would you rather be in a foreclosed home or a travel trailer? I'd rather be in a foreclosed home."

FEMA released a noncommittal statement Wednesday describing the option as one of many "what-ifs" that could be considered in a catastrophe and stating that currently there is no such policy in place.

Sure... sounds dandy. Why not save the federal government a buck or two?? But then again, why is the federal government even in this game in the first place?? Oh that's right, bailing out poor decision making is all the rage these days.

States and local governments, not the federal government, should address potential problems such as these. Oops... looks like the local government there likes the idea too...

Chuck Lanza, Broward's emergency management director, said the idea was worth exploring. Unlike foreclosed homes, trailers would take time to get to where they're needed.

"If we have houses we could move people in quickly," he said. "To us to have extra houses would be great. It makes a lot of sense to have those houses on hand."

Only problem... Broward County does not own the property.

It's unclear whether banks would have any enthusiasm for placing storm refugees in homes they're trying to sell. Alex Sanchez, president of the Florida Bankers Association, said the proposal sounds good in theory but faces several obstacles.

Banks would probably find enthusiasm for helping out if they were paid for the trouble.

If hurricane victims are placed in the house before the title is transferred, who would get the rent payments, he asked, the debtor who defaulted on the mortgage?

Although banks don't particularly want to go into the rental property business, he said, they would want to do their share in an emergency.

"After a hurricane, we want to help," he said. "If the house is livable and the house is vacant, it's the compassionate thing to do. Why not put a Florida family in it for a transition stage?"

Ultimately, however, he said, "We want to get that house back into productive use by a Florida family who will buy it and get that community happy again with a family back in the house."

Said the right things. Compassion is fine and all, but the property is still owned by a private entity and rights should still hold sway. If a bank wants to help, that is up to them, not the government.

Nancy Norris, Florida spokeswoman for JPMorgan Chase, said she couldn't say yet whether the bank would be interested. But she said it takes care of its houses.

"Yes we do have a lot of homes now in our possession because they're in foreclosure. We are actively trying to resell these homes, so we take every precaution to make sure they're protected from hurricanes and from vandals. We treat it just as if we are homeowners, because we are homeowners."

Property owners with rights, she should have said (but in this politically correct world we live in this is the best answer, unfortunately).

Isabel Ulrich, 70, who lived in a FEMA trailer after Hurricane Frances devastated her house in West Palm Beach, said her temporary home actually was very nice.

"It had everything," she said. "A bedroom, a nice kitchen, a microwave. I was very satisfied."

And as a former landlord, she said she worried that hurricane refugees would trash private homes.

"I don't think it's a good idea to put people in houses," she said. "They'll ruin the houses. There's not much to ruin in a trailer."

Truth hurts, and in actuality I'd be willing to bet that the federal government (or state or local governments) would likely pony up even more money to the property owners for repairs than if they shipped a trailer down from Kansas. That is, if the governments actually gave a crap about property rights in the first place and agreed to fix the damage (not caused by a hurricane), which is questionable at best these days.

The proposal came on Wednesday, the day U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D- Miramar, sent a letter to FEMA complaining of a "lack of quality housing" for hurricane victims, particularly poor ones.

Hate to sound cold, but why is that my problem here in Arizona?? People, even poor people, don't have to live near the coast in Florida (you know, like where hurricanes sometimes cause destruction of private property).

State emergency chief Almaguer said he understands the proposal to use foreclosed homes has legal and financial challenges.

LOL... legal challenges?? You mean like throwing out the bundle of rights that come with private property?? Property rights are dying... and WE ARE ALL REALLY GOING TO MISS THEM.

But Hurricane Katrina showed that when people leave an area for temporary housing, they often don't come back.

But shouldn't that be the choice of the individual?? I mean if I owned a home that was destroyed by a hurricane I'd think long and hard about whether or not to rebuild the structure on my property. Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. That is on me, the individual, to weigh the risks involved.

If the government is so concerned about people staying in place... perhaps they'd instead take on the task to defeat hurricanes before they strike and cause damage. You bet, an impossibility as Mom Nature does whatever she wants to do on any given day.

More realistically speaking, governments as well as individuals need to truly evaluate the risks of living in an area that is suspect for natural events such as a hurricane. For the individual it should be an easy decision to make... live with the threat of property destroying storms or don't.

For the governments, which are supposed to be represented by the citizens in potentially affected areas, perhaps a bit more difficult. But efforts could start by imposing zoning and building ordinances that are designed to stand the test of the most catastrophic sort of hurricane, for instance. Of course this would lead to greater expenses for all individuals pondering the decision to live in those locations (or invest or build or do business there), but that alone would take care of the 'poor people' alluded to earlier. They simply wouldn't be able to reside in an area they couldn't afford. They would reside in areas that are affordable to them further away from the greatest threat of devastation (based on the best evaluations of risk).

Bottom line, the government should be more concerned protecting rights rather than perhaps poor decision making. The individual should know the rules as well as the risks and choose accordingly... and take responsibility.

I'll make one very bold prediction... there won't be any hurricanes in Arizona this year.

Property rights under attack (what else in new??)

I'll just say that I'm happy as can be that I don't live in California... but what is happening there could happen in a place like Kingman perhaps some day so I thought I'd pass this link along.

City Forces Property Owner to Give Up Right to Vote: Ninth Circuit Argument

by Timothy Sandefur

Tomorrow I will be arguing the case of Griswold v. City of Carlsbad in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California. This is an astonishing case in which city officials forced the Griswold family to give up their constitutionally protected right to vote in exchange for a building permit. Hard as that might be to believe, it is actually not unique: it's actually quite common for local governments to abuse permits by forcing property owners to give up money or land or other rights.

Please read the whole thing.

Would you sign a waiver??

The meeting for the planning and zoning commission only has two agenda items on it this month. One of them though deals with the ordinance for SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS, or those rascally wind turbines that make the news every so often.

Here is a link to the news article that appears today for tomorrow nights meeting.

I thought I'd share some of my thoughts heading into this subject matter.

First off, the purpose of the ordinance should be to promote safety as it concerns the citizens of Kingman. I agree 100% with that notion as a commissioner on the panel. Lesser parts of the ordinance should allow for effective and efficient uses of alternative energy systems that do not infringe on safety concerns.

My main concern as a citizen of Kingman though are my property rights. I see an alternative energy system as a potential benefit to my property. I can get into specifics, but it is best to just leave what I just said alone. My views as a property owner are just as subjective as any one else that owns property and should simply be respected.

Yet other folks desire these alternative energy sources be used because they deem them to be friendly to the environment, or as a means to reduce global warming (it is snowing today BTW Mr. Gore), or just to feel good about whatever it is that an alternative energy source can make a person feel good. Others are fed up with utility rate hikes (completely understand) and, like the current president, feel compelled to fix the air temperature in their home to whatever temperature that makes them feel happy and without guilt that they are killing the planet. Perhaps a wind turbine and/or some solar powered system will allow it to happen and they are willing to take some risks to improve their wants/needs.

The last group that has an interest in alternative energy sources is the providers of products that offer such things. Folks that participate in the free enterprise system that helped make this country so great.

Now for this agenda item, the city has included materials in the work book that I have read and reviewed. The materials included information from other municipalities, counties, and states that have drafted ordinances that deal with small wind energy systems. Some interesting ideas and perhaps some possible solutions may come out of the session tomorrow night.

I am going to discuss in this blog post a possible solution for the city to consider. I will do my best to make it simple, but I don't do simple as well I would like.

Let's go to the well debated yet seemingly confusing issue of setbacks. As mentioned earlier, the main impetus of such an ordinance from the city should be public safety. What we are talking about is what if the tower somehow fell over??

It would suck to be hanging out in your living room watching TV one moment and then in the next find a wind turbine crashing down through your roof. I get that, it is a legitimate concern.

Likewise, if you kept your prize pure bred canine outside, you wouldn't want your neighbors wind turbine crashing down on Sparky's dog house while he slept peacefully. Maybe you don't have a critter, maybe you just don't want anything to disturb your garden or clothes line... fine. As a property owner you have certain rights to quiet enjoyment and security that a wind turbine falling over could compromise.

So simply, make the setbacks equal to the measure of height of the tower multiplied by a factor of 1.5 for any other structure on any other property surrounding the applicants property. So if an applicant wanted a 200 foot tower, it would have to be at least 300 feet away from any other dwelling on any other lot surrounding the applicants property. Now the 200 foot tower example is purposely extreme in this example.

And if surrounding property owners don't want a tower to fall on their prize garden, then perhaps make the setback equal to the measure of height of the tower multiplied by a factor of 1.1 or some other agreed to factor.

I know, I know... adopting this ordinance would eliminate a clear majority of property owners from obtaining a small wind energy system that may want one within the tiny confines of the city limits . We must keep in mind though that the city must do all it can in terms of safety. So if a property owner knew that he/she has enough space on the property according to the ordinance, they just go right on about getting the product or service they desire. No favoritism, no exceptions, no conditional use permits.

So you don't have enough land space on your property for the required radius conditions of the ordinance... are you out of luck?? Not necessarily.

As you know, I'm a big proponent of private property rights and it is from this perspective that I draw conclusions for many of my opinions. So I ask this question... if I wanted a small wind energy system for my property (all of 8,800 square feet) but a 45 foot tower would potentially collapse on either my property, my neighbor to the east, or my neighbor to the north east, or on a public street to the east... who can possibly be affected by the potential collapse?? The answer of course is all of the above, but no one else.

Now if I wanted to put the tower up in the north east part of my backyard, the street to the east is taken out of the equation. Follow me for a second. Now I approach my two very nice neighbors and tell them of my plans to install a small wind energy system and if they were to agree that it wouldn't be a problem to them for me to place the tower in the location I specified, why would anyone else care??

I'm talking about a waiver policy of course. Something that the local ordinance does not have at this time. The following is an example of part of a waiver policy...

As part of the Special Use Permit or Zoning Permit approval process, property owners may waive the setback requirements of Occupied Buildings on both the Subject Property and/or Adjacent Properties by signing a waiver that sets forth the applicable setback provisions and proposed changes. The written waiver shall notify applicable property owners of the setback required by this ordinance, describe how the proposed wind turbine and/or wind energy facility to not be setback as required by this ordinance. Any such waiver shall be signed by all affected property owners and be recorded in the Currituck County Registrat of Deeds Office. The waiver shall describe teh properties benefited and/or burdened, and advise aqll subsequent purchasers of any burdeneed property that waiver of setback shall run with the land and may forever burden the subject property.

Adding this sort of waiver puts the decision back into the hands of the property owners instead of only the governing body. If the safety concerns are those of other property owners, it is those folks that should address the concerns. It also takes care of potential future property owners with the recording of the waivers on the property deed. Disclose, disclose, disclose.

My property does not adhere to the current zoning ordinance because it is not a half-acre or larger. As a property owner, I believe, that I should have every opportunity to improve my property as I desire as long as it does not affect the property rights of my neighbors. If my neighbors agree to the setback waivers I should be able to proceed.

Of course there is no guarantee that your neighbor would play nice and allow you the opportunity to put up a small wind energy system on your property because your neighbor may have a different perception of what is safe and what isn't in terms of a tall tower in the backyard. There are a couple of current city council members that have already stated at a public meeting that they wouldn't want their neighbors to have such monstrosities near their property... and that is their right as property owners. No one would force them to sign waivers (if the neighbor applicant didn't have enough land space to adhere to the ordinance).

I think a waiver policy is a must in order for the overall ordinance to work properly.

If the city settles on a policy where if a tower was to collapse only on the applicants property only, then permits should be issued for proper installment of a small wind energy system.

If your property does not adhere to the city ordinance but you have neighboring property owners that are possibly affected by the placement of the small wind energy system but are willing to grant you notarized recorded authorization for installation, you should be able to obtain the permit needed to move forward.

It seems as fair and equitable as possible. Protecting property rights must be a focus in our community.

I look forward to tomorrow's meeting, I might even bring some of this up for discussion purpose. Come on down and join that discussion. See ya there!!