Nine proposed constitutional amendments, some of them far reaching, have been introduced in the Vermont Senate. One in particular stands out as a mortal threat to fundamental Vermont principles. That is Proposal 9.
Does private property have to be “habitable” by a species in order for bureaucrats to claim it is that species’ “critical habitat”? In an extreme example of government run amok, a group of environmentalists and federal bureaucrats says “no.”
This broad, bipartisan support for reining in civil forfeiture is reflected in the population at large. One recent poll found that 84 percent of Americans oppose forfeiture of property without a criminal conviction.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants another 60,000 acres of northeast Vermont, and so far the state’s leaders are expressing reservations about the giant land grab.
Kevin Blakeman has enjoyed his 60-acre homestead along bucolic Fay Brook in Windsor County for more than 40 years, but since his town adopted river corridor regulations, he’s not so sure how much of his property is truly his own.
Even with the thumbs up from town officials, residents have clearly not changed their minds about the new farm stressing that it will have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood.