After 10+ years of legal battles with the County of Alameda, Michael Shaw (Lockaway Storage) wins inverse condemnation lawsuit in Appellate Court.

Former PLF attorney scores remarkable regulatory takings victory in Lockaway Storage v. County of Alameda

http://blog.pacificlegal.org/2013/former-plf-attorney-scores-remarkable-regulatory-takings-victory-in-lockaway-storage-v-county-of-alameda/#more-22698

County of Alameda Must Pay Storage Facility Company $2 Million In Damages and Attorney’s Fees For Violation of Constitutional Property Rights
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/5/prweb10723974.htm

IN THE NEWS

Environmentalists battle against public use of Yosemite National Park

Yosemite National Park was set aside by Congress as an area designated for “public use, resort, and recreation for all time.” Now actions under consideration by the National Park Service would limit public use, resort, recreation, and human activity within Yosemite.   Our national parks should be preserved FOR human use – not FROM human use.
(You Tube)

Greenpeace founder worried that envirowhackos getting kind of whacky

When I first caught wind of this story, I’ll confess that I was somewhat surprised to hear it, but at the same time, it reflected some thoughts I’ve had over the years myself. People involved in social movements of all stripes can start out with a genuine interest in doing something good, seeking to donate their time to make the world a better place in some small way. But as these movements grow, it’s not uncommon for them to begin to take a dark turn. Such seems to be the case with Greenpeace, at least in the view of the group’s founder.

(Hot Air)

Group targeted by IRS compiles clip of Obama calling its finances into question

Americans for Prosperity, a leading conservative small-government group, compiled the above clip of President Obama attacking them and calling their finances into question.  AFP was one of the groups that the Internal Revenue Service was pressing Tea Party groups to explain their affiliation with.

A January 2012 letter by the IRS specifically asks an unnamed group: “Regarding Americans for Prosperity: a) explain your relationship; b) provide copies of  any contacts with AFP; c) describe the training program provided by AFP;  d) provide copies of the training material.”

(The Washington Examiner)

Interior Dept: Sequestration is going to mean less firefighting, you know

Just in case you thought the administration had finished drumming up frightening reasons for why Congress really needs to get their stuff together and undo sequestration, never fear. The past few summers, we’ve watched some truly catastrophic wildfires rage across the American landscape, and the Departments of Interior and Agriculture would like you to know that because of these automatic budget cuts, they’re going to be rather hard-pressed to find the adequate resources to mitigate the next round:

(Hot Air)

Congress updating the antiquated Antiquities Act of 1906

The House Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation, held a fascinating hearing on efforts to update the antiquated Antiquities Act of 1906. Congressman Rob Bishop of Utah did an excellent job chairing the hearing.

The room was packed, standing-room-only.  I was wedged between a DC-based staffer from The Wilderness Society and the “National Monuments Campaign Communications Director” of the Conservation Lands Foundation.  In a sea of suits, the Stetson stood out, as did the cowboys who took time off from the range to travel all the way to DC.

(National Center of Public Policy Research Blog)

The Liberty and Property Rights Coalition is committed to promoting and preserving Constitutional rights to liberty and property in public policy and the law.

For more information or to be removed from this list, email rhmorrison@sbcglobal.net.

A service of Liberty and Property Rights Coalition, 2013.

U.S. Claims Court To Hear Case Involving Unlawful Seizure of Livestock by U.S. Forest Service

In a published decision handed down April 4, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims denied a U.S. Forest Service motion to dismiss in a case brought by Arizona rancher Daniel Gabino Martinez asserting a Constitution Fifth Amendment taking of property in the nature of cattle.   The cattle were grazing both on patented lands, and utilizing vested water sources on rangelands appurtenant to the ranch in the area at issue.  The Martinez complaint alleges a taking of property without a either a court order or a warrant, and the denial of Constitutional and statutory due process of law.

Mr. Martinez is one the many victims of the longstanding policy of the federal agencies to extinguish property interests on federally managed lands such as vested water rights, improvements, forage rights and rights of ways without compensation to further their conservation agenda.  Mr. Martinez purchased his rights from his predecessors-in-interest on a ranch that was established in 1882.  The property interests he acquired had vested under the “local laws, customs and court decisions of the times” when the ranch was founded and were acknowledged by Congress in the Mining Act of July 26, 1866.  The property rights had vested in Mr. Martinez by purchase through an exhaustive chain of title through a series of contracts, parol sales and wills dating back to 1882.

Even though Mr. Martinez offered to sign a grazing permit for those areas beyond his vested property rights, the Forest Service denied the permit because Gabino’s  father, Abe Martinez, would not waive his property rights to the agency by signing a “Waiver of Permit”.   The confiscation of the Martinez cattle and source of income for the ranch was part of a thinly veiled attempt by the Forest Service to drive Mr. Martinez out of business and destroy the value of his ranch.  Attorney for the case is Mark Pollot of Boise, Idaho.

(Court House New Service)

PETA Plans to Fly Drones That Would ‘Stalk Hunters’

PETA says it’s actively shopping for a drone to monitor hunters

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is actively shopping for a drone that would “stalk hunters,” the organization said Monday.

The group says it will “soon have some impressive new weapons at its disposal to combat those who gun down deer and doves” and that it is “shopping for one or more drone aircraft with which to monitor those who are out in the woods with death on their minds.”

The group says it will not weaponize the drones, but will use them to film potentially illegal hunting activity and turn it over to law enforcement.

(U.S. News)

Top Ten Crazy Global Warming Solutions

Here’s the top ten list from the California Chapter of American’s for Prosperity.
#10 Wrap Greenland in a Blanket
#9 Make More Clouds
#8 Giant Space Mirrors
#7 Make Us All Vegans
#6 Live in Trash with Heat from Sewers
#5 Algae Covered Buildings
#4 Mechanical Soda Trees
#3 Skyscraper Farms
#2 Less Humans
# 1 Craziest idea to solve global warming — A World of Midgets with Catlike Eyes Who Don’t Eat Meat.

(You Tube)

Congressman McClintock’s Letter to Park Service Takes Issue with Attempts to Block Public Access In Yosemite

In a letter to Park Service Superintendant Don Nuebacher, Congressman Tom McClintock (R-CA) criticizes the National Park Service Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) regarding Yosemite National Park and the Merced River which runs through it.  In particular, McClintock takes issue with the DEIS proposals which eliminate the public’s access within the park and river contrary to the intent of Congress when it created Yosemite.

(Sierra Sun Times)

And Since its Tax Day…Where Does Your Tax Dollar Go?

Today is tax day – the day when every American has to file with their income taxes with the Internal Revenue Service. The Heritage Foundation has come up with a snazzy graphic so that Americans can see where each percentage of every tax dollar that the federal government takes goes:

(Townhall.com)

The Liberty and Property Rights Coalition is committed to promoting and preserving Constitutional rights to liberty and property in public policy and the law.

For more information or to be removed from this list, email rhmorrison@sbcglobal.net.

A service of Liberty and Property Rights Coalition, 2013.

PNP comment: If you can get this Letter to the Editor to come up, it is worth reading the REAL scope on the Anselmo problem with Shasta County Board of Supervisors. Remember, the church is a private building on his property. — Editor Liz Bowen

Redding Record Searchlight.com

Letter to the Editor

April 14. 2013

As one of the attorneys representing Reverge Anselmo in his “troubles” with the Shasta County, Tuesday’s article revealing that the county had spent over $522,000 on outside legal counsel came as no surprise. And the county leaders themselves knew what they were getting into when they hired a large Southern California law firm to pursue a nonstop “scorched earth” prosecution of Anselmo cost-be-damned. This waste of public funds ought to shock county taxpayers. But what I find almost as troubling is the dissembling cover-up by county representatives claiming that they have really tried to resolve these issues with Anselmo, and that they are only “defending” themselves.

READ it:

http://www.redding.com/news/2013/apr/14/walt-mcneill-anselmo-is-more-than-willing-to/?partner=popular

PNP comment: One very important thing this article l did not include is that Anselmo has paid all of his Permit fees. His chapel is private and initially was treated as just another building on his property and he paid for all the Permits needed to build a building on his property. — Editor Liz Bowen

• By Alayna Shulman

Redding.com

• Posted March 19, 2013 at 10 p.m.

A few dozen supporters of Anselmo Vineyards rallied outside the Shasta County Administration Center Tuesday morning to celebrate a relative victory in court announced Monday and push for a resolution to the legal war between vintner Reverge Anselmo and Shasta County.

Ruth Angel, a founder of county refrom group the Integrity Project, said they organized the rally Monday after finding out a federal judge had ruled that most of the legal complaints from the county against the winery’s owner, Reverge Anselmo, belonged in superior court, which his attorneys considered a blow to the county.

READ it:

 http://www.redding.com/news/2013/mar/19/anselmo-vineyards-employees-integrity-project/?partner=newsletter_headlines

IN THE NEWS

 Liberty Scene

Liberty and Property Rights Coalition

EPA’s Secret Deals with Environmentalists

The EPA is under investigation for a practice called Sue and Settle. Environmentalists in government and private organizations have found ways to create new regulations by fashioning lawsuits tailored to have courts institute policy changes. Both parties involved in the lawsuits secretly decide in advance what the outcome will be and how much taxpayer money will be transferred to the environmental group in the settlement. In other words, they are exploiting the courts to change laws, and in the process, helping to fund radical environmental groups without legislative or taxpayer consent. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been given to these groups.

(You Tube)

Pacific Legal Foundation asks Supreme Court to Protect Western Water Rights

Recently, PLF attorneys filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the estates of Nevada ranchers, E. Wayne and Jane Hage. The Hages, and their children, have been fighting for over twenty years to preserve their water rights from federal agencies.

Water rights, like those owned by the Hages, are essential to ranching and other natural resource industries throughout the western United States. In their case, a federal agency interfered with the Hages’ rights to access and maintain the flow of water to their ranch. The U.S. Claims Court determined that the agency’s actions resulted in physical and regulatory takings of their water rights. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, however, reversed the trial court’s conclusion without addressing the merits of their claims. The court held that the Hages’ case—which arose nearly a quarter century ago—is premature!

(Pacific Legal Foundation)

Is Corporate Funding of Environmental Groups a Form of Hush Money and Necessary Cost of Business?

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho – The Sierra Club, a group with a documented history of shilling for cash accused via Twitter this morning the oil and gas lobby of buying support for the Keystone XL pipeline.

The Sierra Club took a shot at the American Petroleum Institute, a pro-oil and gas development group, with this tweet: (See article)

(Watchdog.org)

A New Spotted Owl?

The western sage grouse is just the latest in the long list of endangered species which have been successfully used by their environmental proponents as economic weapons of destruction in the West.  After the spotted owl was listed as an endangered species in the 1990’s the western timber industry was eradicated from our nation’s forests, leaving the timber to rot from disease and be consumed by catastrophic fires.

Thirty Clark County, Nevada ranchers went broke as a result of the ESA listing of the desert tortoise.  Tortoise eggs were determined to be in danger of cows stepping on them.  Despite the fact that cattle, sheep and tortoises had cohabitated in the southern Nevada desert for more than a century, ranchers were forced to abandon their vested water rights and forage rights for the tortoise.  Once the lands were cleared of ranchers then Nevada BLM Chief, Bob Abby pursued a public land selling spree to Las Vegas developers armed with excavators and paving equipment.  (Emails Link Former Chief of the BLM’s Ex BLM Chief Bob Abbey to Henderson, NV Land Scandal) Environmentalists and bureaucrats were suddenly mute on the subject of the desert tortoise.

History shows that endangered species listings have less to do with saving the lives of animals and more to do with taking property and water rights by circumventing that pesky provision in the Constitution—just compensation.  See this special report in Range Magazine about the new spotted owl, “The Sage Grouse”.

(Range Magazine)

Ron Arnold: A Journalism Nonprofit’s Nonagenda Agenda

Among the standout names of outfits recently whacking the Donors Trust is the nonprofit investigative journalism organization known as the Center for Public Integrity. To many, the group’s name seems presumptuous and agenda-laden, despite its insistence that it is “nonpartisan and does no advocacy work.”

(Washington Examiner)

The Liberty and Property Rights Coalition is committed to promoting and preserving Constitutional rights to liberty and property in public policy and the law.

For more information or to be removed from this list email rhmorrison@sbcglobal.net.

A service of Liberty and Property Rights Coalition 2013

PNP comment: This is a fabulous decision. The “wetlands” label has been sorely misused! — Editor Liz Bowen

World Net Daily.com

by Bob Unruh

A lawsuit by a New Mexico couple whose dry, sandy homestead had been classified as a wetland by federal government regulators is being dropped after Washington agreed to stop mislabeling the land.

The Pacific Legal Foundation confirmed today the lawsuit on behalf of Peter and Frankie Smith ended after the federal decision to “stop labeling their dry land as a ‘water of the United States.’”

As WND reported, the couple had been warned by the federal government not to touch trash – tin cans, broken glass and the like – that had accumulated over the years on the 20 acres of desert land, because it could harm the Rio Grande River, 25 miles away. The couple bought the land near Santa Fe to build a retirement home.

The lawsuit claimed Washington was over-reaching in its claim that the land, which does not contain any “relatively permanent, standing or continuously body of water,” can be regulated by the Clean Water Act.

PLF recently won another major private-property rights battle at the U.S. Supreme Court over federal control of water on private property. The justices ruled landowners have a right to contest a summary order to stop using their private land because of federal wetlands regulations.

In the case, the federal government determined land in Priest Lake, Idaho, being used for the construction of a home was “wetlands.” The feds ordered the owners to turn over their records, provide detailed personal information, return the land to its natural state and leave it that way for years before seeking permission to develop it.

The high court said the EPA must provide a process through which a challenge to its decision can be made in a meaningful way. The law firm working on behalf of the land owner called the decision a “precedent-setting victory for the rights of all property owners.”

In the Smith case, the couple was told by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that a dry creek bed on their land was a “water of the United States” and therefore subject to the Clean Water Act.

“Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws”

Attorneys were concerned the dispute could set a nationwide precedent for property owners’ right to challenge unsubstantiated allegations by regulators operating under the Clean Water Act.

The Smiths’ land is 20 acres off State Road 14 near Santa Fe. They had been cleaning up trash, cans, glass and other debris that had accumulated before they bought the land.

The government classified the private property as an arroyo, claimed jurisdiction and ordered the Smiths to “halt any clean-up of dead trees and trash that had accumulated under a prior owner.”

“The federal government was engaged in an illegal land grab by mislabeling the Smiths’ property and misusing the Clean Water Act,” said PLF attorney Jennifer M. Fry.

“The Smiths’ desert property is bone dry, and it is 25 miles away from the nearest navigable water, the Rio Grande. On the rare occasion when there is rain at the Smiths’ property, water must pass through a second dry arroyo and then through an intermittent flowing creek and two dams before reaching the Rio Grande. So the federal government’s justification for claiming Clean Water Act jurisdiction over the Smiths’ property was nonsensical.”

Fry said she and her colleagues “are glad that federal officials have agreed to back off and stop classifying the Smiths’ dry land as ‘wet.’”

“But it’s unfortunate that it took a lawsuit to force the feds to pull the plug on their plans and leave the Smiths alone,” she said.

Fry said the case “should put the federal government on notice.”

“If they try this ploy again – if they try, in effect, to seize private property by conjuring up a mirage of water where there isn’t any – PLF is ready to fight them in court, anywhere in the country,” she warned.

In a statement released by PLF, Peter Smith said he hoped the victory “will give confidence and inspiration to property owners all across the country.”

“They, too, can fight back if the federal government tramples on their rights by misusing the Clean Water Act and failing to abide by the rule of law,” he said.

See the Smiths’ reaction to the development:

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/feds-stop-calling-dry-land-water/#o6OwtdjGgDBUeXsK.99

http://www.infowars.com/seattle-becomes-next-city-to-use-crime-prediction-software/

Mikael Thalen
Infowars.com
March 3, 2013

Seattle has become the next city to start using crime prediction software. Mayor Mike McGinn and Police Chief John Diaz announced that two precincts in the Southwest and East will begin using the software known as PREDPOL, short for “predictive policing.”

“The predictive policing software is estimated to be twice as effective as a human data analyst working from the same information. It’s all part of our effort to build an agile, flexible and innovative police department that provides the best service possible to the public,” said Diaz.

The program consists of a mathematical algorithm similar to the one used in earthquake prediction. Sociological information about criminal behavior and five years’ worth of past crime data is compiled to predict when and where a future crime will likely take place, down to a 500-square-foot area.

“This technology will allow us to be proactive rather than reactive in responding to crime; this investment, along with our existing hot spot policing work, will help us to fulfill the commitments we made in the ’20/20′ plan to use data in deploying our officers to make our streets safer,” said McGinn during a recent news conference.

As soon as April, police plan to roll out the software to every precinct in the city. Civil liberties advocates have already questioned if the software has the ability to collect data on specific individuals.

“We have no plans to move anywhere close to the individual. You’ll – rightly – run into a variety of Constitutional problems almost immediately,” said PREDPOL’s Director of Government Relations and Strategy Ryan Coonerty.

In light of Seattle’s secret participation in a pilot program for TrapWire, a CCTV surveillance system that recognizes people from their walk and face, many residents don’t trust Seattle Police, who have recently been under federal investigation for questionable police tactics.

Other recent surveillance technologies in the city, such as the 30 Department of Homeland Security-funded surveillance cameras on Seattle’s popular waterfront area, which were caught pointing inward, not towards the coast line like intended, have caused a backlash from Seattle residents.

Just last month, police in Tacoma, Wash. received federal funding for the same crime prediction software. PREDPOL also says it is in talks with police in over 200 cities worldwide that want to use the software.

The voice of freedom radio has for the past month informed our audience to the FACT that the Sierra Nevada Conservency and the Sierra Nevada Alliance is apart of Agenda 21 backed-up and supported by the California Dept of Water Resources.

On July 17/18 2012 , in Kings Beach, CA  these two enviro groups united in message and part of Agenda 21 was consulting on ways to fund water projects such as the Pitt River I.R.W.M.’S

Katie Burdick & Company was hired by a rancher in McARTHUR … DID HE KNOW WHAT AGENGA 21 WAS ?

DID HE CARE ?

I have asked some ranchers and their answer is they just want to farm and need water.

My question of that is HOW  IS KATIE BURDIC,  AN ENVIRO, GOING TO GET FARMERS / RANCHERS MORE WATER?

It seems when Burdick leaves afer the project is complete  all of a sudden dams put in and built to help all forms of life both human and animal  are sued, because it does’nt fit into the enviro Agenda 21.

Her foot print is in the Yuba River the leader in the C.A.B.Y. FORUM SHE LED.

The enviros are suing to take out two damns one is the Englebrite –  that’s on the lower Yuba river.

At the enviro meeting in July last year there were 3 people at the head table:  one was JIM BRENHAM head of the SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVANCY and GARY BARDINI  who the deputy director of Calif Water Resources was the guest speaker.

Mr Bardini informed a large audiance that the I.R.W.M. PROJECTS  was a diective from the UNITED NATIONS to the FEDS and they didn’t know how to implement it, so the feds gave it to the states and all of the enviro groups need to sell the program to the public.

MY FRIEND ATTENDED THAT MEETING.  AND WE BROADCASTED THIS MESSAGE ON kcfj 570 A.M. ON FEB 23, AT 12 NOON FOR THE PEOPLE TO HEAR and make up their own minds to what’s taking place in their own Pitt River.

Your response was great so we will replay this message again on MAR 2, AT 12 NOON on KCFJ, right after Rush.

I almost forgot, oh, KATIE BURDICK was at this same meeting and MR. CADD SPOKE TO HER.

OH YOU KNOW THE NICE LADY WHO IS LEADIND THE PITT RIVER IRWM PROJECT.

Ranchers /farmers, please, GO AND GET A BINDER COPY OF THE PROJECT AND READ IT.

A good reason to read this, it’s only your property at stake.

WATER LEADS TO MONEY,

MONEY LEADS TO POWER.

PLEASE DONT GIVE THEM THE POWER OR GIVE THEM ANY CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING AND YES MY FELLOW AMERICANS THERE IS A GOD.

DOUG KNOX in Alturas, CA.

Helvengstons launch protest of Orlando’s law after facing fines

            Author:  Kristin Giannas, Reporter, kgiannas@clickorlando.com

            Published On: Jan 07 2013 04:38:34 PM EST                      Updated On: Jan 09 2013 05:11:33 PM EST

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/College-Park-couple-says-front-yard-vegetable-garden-is-under-fire-again/-/1637132/18035884/-/png2kpz/-/index.html

ORLANDO, Fla. -

A College Park couple’s vegetable garden is on the chopping block again after the city threatened fines if they don’t uproot it by Thursday, according to the Institute for Justice Florida Chapter.

Jason and Jennifer Helvengston are launching “Plant a Seed, Change the Law,” a protest of Orlando’s law, which they say violates their constitutional right to peacefully use their property to grow their own food.

In November, Local 6 broke the story about the controversial garden after the city told the Helvengstons their 25-by-25-foot front yard vegetable garden was not in compliance with the city’s code.

After hundreds of emails supporting the couple flowed in and initially allowing the Helvengstons to keep their garden, saying it will hold off on violations, the city has since asked the couple to uproot the garden and replace it with a lawn or face fines, according to the Institute for Florida Justice Chapter.

“The greatest freedom you can give someone is the freedom to know they will not go hungry,” said Jason Helvengston. “Our Patriot Garden pays for all of its costs in healthy food and lifestyle while having the lowest possible carbon footprint. It supplies valuable food while being attractive. I really do not understand why there is even a discussion. They will take our house before they take our Patriot Garden.”
According to Ari Bargil, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, the Helvengstons were supposed to have a scheduled inspection on Thursday, resulting in fines up to $500 a day.

However on Tuesday afternoon, Orlando city officials told Local 6 the case is on hold and has been for several months.

“We’re trying to provide clarity, at this point, the code is not clear,” said John Ippel, the sustainability director for the City of Orlando.

Ippel told Local 6 on Wednesday the city in the process of updating its landscaping code, incorporating language that will address front yard gardens. The city council should be making a vote by March, according to Ippel.

“We endorse gardens, we’re invested in community gardens, we’ve done workshops on gardening, we’re not against home gardens,” Ippel said on behalf of the city.