While the proletariat live in cramped "worker's housing" and ride slow, smelly trams to work, important people will live in dachas and ride to work in Volgas because they have important responsibilities and must make important decisions too difficult for ordinary citizens.

I swear I've seen this movie somewhere before...

What a joke....
developers should provide at least 1 parking space per unit or have the renters sign something that says they will never own a car...

Rex has a 75 ft long driveway, enough for 4 cars, a garage for a car plus, 40 ft of street frontage for parking, enough for 3 cars. Total of 8 cars, but he wants the rest of us to give up our cars and ride a tricycle.

I've had enough of these Czars. Off with their heads.

I'd like to see Rex live in 1 of these human warehouses & do without a car...Then he can post silly things like that on his blog...what a tool...

He said after a meeting years ago when he heard complaints about the density housing that this type of housing would not only be for low income people but in the future would be for the children and grandchildren!
How long has he been involved in this kind of "planning" for how WE should all live?
Wonder what the Coalition for a Livable Future thinks of these future plans? I believe he was or is involved with that group - some future!!

Rex wants 1 million on Zillow.com to "make [him] move":

http://www.zillow.com/homes/2824-SE-YAMHILL-ST-,-portland,-or_rb/

A couple years ago Rex responded to criticism about WES by saying, "We probably should have given that more thought".

That could be Metro's slogan.

Imagine how well it fits to so many other things.

Unfortunately, instead of learning and giving things more thought the opposite is happening.

I knew Rex when he served on Metro. He is a nice guy personally. But, he had some oddball ideas and was a lightweight when it came to governance. While I do not know this for certain, he always struck me as someone's grown-up trust fund kid. Well educated - highly unmotivated - mostly disconnected from work-a-day citizens.

Rex is another tool for Agenda 21.

Where did it originate?

The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.

What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?

More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.

What do bikes have to do with it?

National groups such as Complete Streets, Thunderhead Alliance, and others, have training programs teaching their members how to pressure for redevelopment, and training candidates for office. It's not just about bike lanes, it's about remaking cities and rural areas to the 'sustainable model'. High density urban development without parking for cars is the goal. This means that whole towns need to be demolished and rebuilt in the image of sustainable development. Bike groups are being used as the 'shock troops' for this plan.

Upon reading Tim's comment above, my first thought was that this is just another one of many tin-foil hat rants that this blog sometimes attracts (occasionally some even being my own!), but one can't escape the fact that he does describe how the situation feels and appears with remarkable accuracy.

Everyone needs to read that blog and leave a comment

Just to throw more fuel to the fire if anybody thinks this is not really happening:

Consider this quote from J. Gary Lawrence, a planner for the city of Seattle, and an adviser to the President’s Council for Sustainable Development:

“Participating in a U.N. advocated planning process would very likely bring out many… who would actively work to defeat any elected official… undertaking Local Agenda 21. So we will call our process something else, such as “comprehensive planning,” “growth management,” or “smart growth.”

http://portlandmaps.com/detail.cfm?action=Permits&folder=2554849&propertyid=R175748&state_id=1S1E01BC%20%20200&address_id=648683&intersection_id=&dynamic_point=0&x=7654510.976&y=681279.311&place=2824%20SE%20YAMHILL%20ST&city=PORTLAND&neighborhood=SUNNYSIDE&seg_id=116284

I see Rex had a complaint filed against him for being a rat..oh wait a minute; he left a break in his sewer line unattended long enough to generate a complaint for the foul smell and abundance of rats. Truly a man who pays attention to details.

Tim's citations demonstrates what is dangerous with all encompassing edicts. They may have good intentions (and that's debatable), but their enactments are a loose cannon. With so many interpretative words, phrases the outcomes can be disastrous. They are up for interpretation by Planners/Bureaucrats/Pols.

We have so many similar Edicts like Amanda Fritz's Equity Bureau's long policy documents. Or Oregon's 1977 Land Use Comprehensive Plan with 18 general Guidelines that has been reduced to "no parking" on your own property. This demonstrates how Oregon's restrictive urban growth boundary can be deduced by bureaucrats to mean "no parking". The same applies to Agenda 21.

To extend the discussion about manipulative groups controlling our government from the Feds (EPA) down to the local level (What city doesn't have an Office of Sustainability?) -- I give you Joseph Romm. An Ecology-themed book club, sponsored by the Lake Oswego Library, last fall had on it reading list a book by Romm titled, "Language Intelligence." Lessons on Persuasion.

I get how the Greenies are twisting all the messages to make everyone feel like Endtimes are coming unless we follow their path to salvation, but it surprises me that their message is always tied up with political crap that has nothing to do with the environment. Witness Romm's website: www.thinkprogress.org He has sections on LGBT, Rape Culture, Abortion, Obamacare, NRA, Food (they actually advocate using roadkill as a source of a nutritious food supply!), etc. The messages are suffocating, but the methods of preaching are being spread -- "Short words win. If you don't repeat, you can't compete.) The end is our doom I guess. If there are more ignorant young people willing to listen to the crapola, then common sense loses.

Tim,
What about the education system under Agenda 21?
I am concerned about the "training" there.
This all appears to have been so carefully planned long before any of us ever heard about this.
If "smart growth" is this wave of whatever going on, then we need to ask each person running for office if they are for smart growth. Quite frankly, I feel betrayed by our elected officials and if they are for this, it is far worse!
No wonder when they are approached they act like they know better than us, perhaps they have been trained too, so I'll bet they know what the plan is all about - why else do they act against us?

Teresa -- it only took 9 months to fix that sewer from complaint to complete. Nice.

Teresa, it would appear from the records that Jack links above that Rex bought the place in 2009. The complaint you cite was in 2006-2007.

A little reading comprehension goes a long way.

Kari Chisholm,
Since you read, what do you think about the conversation today that was brought up about smart growth, as was discussed a term used for Agenda 21?

Rex perpetuates the same tired argument that providing parking in new apartment developments, "raises costs and therefore reduces affordability."

The rents I've seen on these places are based on "market rate" and the maximum amount the developer/owner can get for the space. I don't see anybody who provided parking charging appreciably more unless there are other amenities. Nobody would rent their units. Besides, many apartment complexes with less parking than tenants charge for use of parking spaces or garages.

This same argument is used every time self-serve gas in Oregon comes up. Worked really well for Washington, didn't it? I haven't noticed that their gas prices are cheaper because customers pump their own.

Ditto for liquor sales in Washington. Eliminate the government and your booze will be cheaper and easier to get. Or at least that was what the snake oil salesmen argued.

Not to mention, until recently, apartment developers routinely included parking. That they don't want to do so now doesn't mean that they can't, but that they wouldn't make as much money. If forced to, one of three things would happen (and neither of them would be greatly increased rents):

1) Cheaper materials and construction
2) A charge for using the parking spaces
3) The project does not go forward