Concerns about United Nations Agenda 21

NM HM96 Erosion of Sovereignty & Property Ownership

I was asked to draft a resolution for United Nations Agenda 21 concerns by New Mexico State Representative Thomas A. Anderson called HM96,  a resolution that is being heard on the New Mexico House of Representatives floor this morning.

Originally these concern were addressed in HB307 but it failed to reach the house floor for a vote.

One of many concerns in this resolution addresses language referencing "sustainable development" which is overly broad and can be misused to "condemn" private property in attempts to join all wildlands and wilderness areas.

If your property is surrounded by such "federal" lands then you can be displaced by imminent domain. The fair market value would be based on the property condemned.

However this would make it difficult for property owners to purchase replacement property in another location likely being more expensive, and gives no status or method for recognition for the previous historical usage.


Below is a map of Federal Public Lands. As you can see in the western portion of the United States a large percentage of land is NOT private and is a checkerboard mix.

Any attempt to join "wildlands" and "wilderness" will have detrimental affects on private property ownership. Other issues are concerns that single family homes, ranches, small farms will be condemned to create "sustainable development" multi-family dwellings and multi-use facilities to replace the inefficient single usage.

Some of these ideas are more easily understood back East where there is "urban blight" and a smaller percentage of Federal Public Lands. However, it still doesn't change a concern that "due process" may be circumvented by an application of the Supremacy Clause where "federal" law trumps "state" law and international law is seen to be increasing in authority and citation by local courts.

There are many other instances for concern that can be addressed more adequately in a future post. I wanted to respond to oppositional comments that this is an attempt to "demonize" global environmental organizations, including the (ICLEI) International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives and the (IUCN) International Union for Conservation of Nature.

I don't believe name calling is beneficial to any attempt to rationally debate the concern for the possibility for potential misuse, and misinterpretation of broadly construed initiatives. I do believe that any such initiatives must address such concerns as outline in HM96.