LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER

Court case warns EPA could 'own' your land!

Petition to Supremes cites danger of 'ruinous' compliance order fines

Posted: February 26, 2011 1:00 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh 2011 WorldNetDaily

Read more: Court case warns EPA could 'own' your land!

A legal team asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in an Idaho controversy is warning landowners that under the compliance order procedures being used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency virtually anyone could be told to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in permit fees – or face hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and penalties – over ordinary home construction work.

A petition for certiorari has been submitted to the court by Pacific Legal, an organization working on behalf of the Sackett family of Idaho.

They own a half-acre lot in a residential area near Priest Lake and wanted to build a home. But after excavation work was begun the EPA "swooped in" with a "compliance order" that requires them to undo the excavation and restore the "wetlands," and then leave it for three years at which point they could seek a "permit" that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Or they could wait for the EPA to prosecute the alleged Clean Water Act violations, which could result in penalties of $25,000-plus per day.

According to officials with Pacific Legal, the Sacketts' land has no standing water or any continuously flowing water, and they would like an opportunity to challenge the EPA's "wetlands" determination in court.

(Story continues here)

The EPA has been doing this kind of stuff for a number of years now and appear to be getting more strident about it since Obama got into power.

I hope their method of operating gets squashed. It would be even better if they targeted some of the biggest greenie leaders with this kind of abuse of power. Maybe then some of the enviro-nazis would begin to understand what their lobbying efforts have created and unleashed on ordinary Americans.

THe whole point of WND and all the other rightwing rags is to demonize the EPA so that the right can get rid of it for the benefit of the Koch bros and the like but a detriment to your health and safety.

If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

(02-26-2011 05:54 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

If it's fine with you letting the NYT, huffpo and DU, not that they're reputable, decide what you should and shouldn't read, who are we to care.

(02-26-2011 05:54 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

Specifically, What in this article is not reputable. Do you guys from WI even have enough sense to read before commenting?

(02-26-2011 07:54 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-26-2011 05:54 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

Specifically, What in this article is not reputable. Do you guys from WI even have enough sense to read before commenting?

WI? What are you talking about?

And much like Breitbart, WND has been caught in so many lies and for making **** up that I would not even trust it to give me the day of the week!

(02-27-2011 01:56 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-26-2011 07:54 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(02-26-2011 05:54 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

Specifically, What in this article is not reputable. Do you guys from WI even have enough sense to read before commenting?

WI? What are you talking about?

And much like Breitbart, WND has been caught in so many lies and for making **** up that I would not even trust it to give me the day of the week!

Excuse... MI. So specifically this article. I won't hold my breath.

If you don't pay your property taxes, the govt. kicks you out.

If you don't pay your rent, your landlord kicks you out.

It appears we're only just renting the property we own. And you can't take it with you when you die. Everything we own is just rented.

(02-26-2011 05:54 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If you can find this story on a reputable site, I might read it, but WND? Puhleeeze!

I did a search for "Sackett family of Idaho and all kinds of stuff popped up. If these folks were black our favorite block heads, Al and Jesse, would be screaming about the racial injustice of it all.

Isn't it Hawaii, where non-native islanders(people born in Hawaii) can't own land? Like, if I were to "buy" land there, I'd be signing like an 80 year lease on it? (technically, though, I doubt I'll live to be 104, but we're going with it for ***** and giggles.) Is that any different?

Another Agency/Department that should be targeted for elimination.

And by the way ... let's get down to the core of this issue:

SO LONG AS YOU PAY PROPERTY TAX ... you are owning nothing and merely leasing from the government. Property Tax is an affront to and attack on property rights ... one of THE most basic rights there is.

(02-27-2011 09:47 PM)CountryRedHawk Wrote:  Isn't it Hawaii, where non-native islanders(people born in Hawaii) can't own land? Like, if I were to "buy" land there, I'd be signing like an 80 year lease on it? (technically, though, I doubt I'll live to be 104, but we're going with it for ***** and giggles.) Is that any different?

Not so, the Japanese own quite a bit of Hawaii. Now Mexico, that's another story.

(02-27-2011 09:49 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And by the way ... let's get down to the core of this issue:

SO LONG AS YOU PAY PROPERTY TAX ... you are owning nothing and merely leasing from the government. Property Tax is an affront to and attack on property rights ... one of THE most basic rights there is.

Ya know, I'm beginning to wonder why you don't buy and go live on your island somewhere

(02-27-2011 10:14 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-27-2011 09:49 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And by the way ... let's get down to the core of this issue:

SO LONG AS YOU PAY PROPERTY TAX ... you are owning nothing and merely leasing from the government. Property Tax is an affront to and attack on property rights ... one of THE most basic rights there is.

Ya know, I'm beginning to wonder why you don't buy and go live on your island somewhere

I will be a homesteader. I want about 30 acres, which I would then line with hedgerow. Land, unlike our currency, always retains its value in the long term.

(02-27-2011 10:17 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  . Land, unlike our currency, always retains its value in the long term.

unless its had a nuke dropped on it.

(02-27-2011 11:28 PM)Tulsaman Wrote:  

(02-27-2011 10:17 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  . Land, unlike our currency, always retains its value in the long term.

unless its had a nuke dropped on it.

Touche, but I think there's low odds of that.

This is not a new story and it's not a new issue. Very few if any posters on this board were alive when there WEREN'T surface water pollution controls in this country (pre-1948). The intent of those laws is to ensure that waters of the US remain as clean as possible. It's pretty hard to argue with that. If we're going to live with these laws (and I don't see any practical way around that) the government has to have an ability to enforce them strongly because the worst violations aren't residential, they're industrial. As someone who actually gets paid by people who violate these laws, even I appreciate that the Clean Water Act is enforced inappropriately at times. That needs to be repaired.

Wetlands (the crux of this case because the owners graded and filled some in) are part of the way that water is cleaned naturally. I don't know the back story of this particular case but it looks like they bought property without doing much due diligence (strike one) and decided to develop without seeking the appropriate permits (strike two). Now, if they were mislead or misinformed when talking to their local agency (city/county), well, that's troubling because it's sometimes difficult to figure this stuff out on your own. But if they pursued construction without permits I don't have much sympathy.

All that said, if it turns out this portion of wetlands isn't really that big of a deal or isn't really wetlands and it turns out they'd be eligible for a permit to construct without too much modification then it is silly to make them restore the property. I'd assess a small fine and let them proceed. That 3 year waiting period I don't understand and the "hundreds of thousands" for a permit sounds like alarmist BS.

One way to get the government on your back is to fark around with a wetland. You see it quite a bit up here since MN has the most wetland area in the lower 48.

Something as simple as adding rocks to your shoreline to stop erosion can bring a large fine.