Will County Government Overreach Never End?

Over the past several weeks, I have shared with you knowledge of an outside agenda actively working to guide Forsyth County planning purposes.  Last week, I documented the progression of that agenda, one which emerged several decades ago under the auspices of the United Nations and which reshaped an entire body of US Federal regulations during the administration of President Bill Clinton.  Since then, those regulations have been continually expanded and enforced on the states.  That agenda has a name: “Agenda 21-Sustainable Development.”

What led me to bring this up is that a few weeks back I discovered a movement afoot in the workings of the Forsyth County Planning Department, an initiative to empower county government to control and standardize what new privately-built homes in Forsyth County must look like.  As a builder in my 4th decade, that prospect is so peculiar, so foreign and shocking, I had to know more. 

So I attended three associated events, three “Delphi Sessions,” in which private consultants paid by our tax dollars entertained unsuspecting crowds of twenty or less.  At each meeting, the few who did attend and to whom the consultants pushed their program, in effect, represented the entire county population of over 200,000 citizens.  Obviously, therefore, these publicly-advertised sessions are an attempt to lend credibility to the idea that the consultant’s predetermined final recommendations will derive from democratic processes.  And now a questionnaire has been placed on the county website requesting input.  Importantly, no one gets to see the data gathered and “none of the above” is never an option.  This is “steering,” friends. And we’re not talking about normal zoning considerations—lot sizes, setbacks and the like.  We’re talking about arbitrary percentages of various required exterior materials, obscure window details, cornice elements, even arrangement of rooms and more. The plan is for our county commission to incorporate a finally-agreed set of aesthetic and architecturally-oriented design requirements into the zoning ordinances governing homes to be built in RES2, 3 and 4 classifications.

Once these standards are fixed into local code, county government would undertake an entirely new set of costly responsibilities.  Prior to permitting, each proposed home plan would be reviewed by members of an architectural review staff.  As homes complete, members of that team would embark into the field, traveling in county vehicles to verify compliance with the assumptions approved during the original plan reviews.  Perchance a constructed home might finish a percent or two shy of, say, a brick requirement under the ordinance, according to our planning director a builder would have the option of bricking over windows to bring the home into compliance.  That is a scary thought.

As an experienced builder reviewing the proposed standards, one who incidentally does not build in the zoning categories affected, I soon recognized where these requirements eventually lead.  They circle right back to clear-cut developments, minimal lot sizes and maximum density, fulfilling the goals of Agenda 21.  If that were not true the proposed design standards would not include the planting of one 2” caliper tree on each lot. Why would anyone need a 2” caliper tree if the trees surrounding the homesite were left in place, as they would except for developer clear cutting? Why would the proposed requirements include blanket provisions standardizing the locations of garages, specifying that they must sit back ten feet from any adjacent plane of the home, unless the developer were necessarily clear cutting the area to engineer the building pad elevations thus ensuring that each finished driveway forced into position would properly drain?  And why the need for centrally-located ¾ acre play spaces no more than 700 feet from any home unless the homesites themselves had no play spaces?  What we are seeing here is Agenda 21 covertly at work shaping a framework for our local zoning ordinances to eventually achieve overall sustainable development goals.  Perhaps we should expect this from professional county planners trained and certified under the academic rigors of sustainable development ideology rather than any other approach.

And all this is unconstitutional anyway.  There is a difference between government “restricting” what builders and developers “can” build, protecting public safety and certain vital public interests, versus “prescribing” what they “must” build, promoting a government agenda.  The latter is what this initiative to empower residential design standards is all about. 

Government-mandated residential design standards are just another very costly government program, enforcing arbitrary standards on private parties, empowering government for the sake of government. These requirements are one more step in a march of government control over the lives of private citizens and owners of private property.  And regardless the final state of any original crafted standards, the incorporation of blanket residential design standards into our zoning ordinances creates a framework necessary for future boards to increasingly strengthen control over citizen life, which is the real purpose here.

Our elected representatives on the Forsyth Board of Commissioners have limited powers, not blanket powers. There is a difference between a board “negotiating” on behalf of local residents, on a case-by-case basis with developers seeking zoning changes, versus “blanketly mandating” that all developers and builders adhere to arbitrary design standards throughout the county.  The former leads to a voluntary agreement, the latter to government violating private property rights protected under the 5th Amendment.

So ask yourself, once this program of local government prescribing what homes must look like is locked into place, where does the next costly government overreach end? My experience is that it never ends.