| OCR Text |
Show Reay Speaks Out Against Land Use Proposition Editor's Note: Delmar Reay, candidate for State Legislature, Legisla-ture, District 34, has written an lextremely long article on Land Use Act (against) and it was to have been the second sec-ond of a three part article. Because of its length, and the lack of space, the Review has edited many of the remarks. re-marks. by Delmar Reay We shall now quote from the Act (Sec. 5, Sub Sec. 1) "The commission is authorized authoriz-ed to perform and exercise the following functions, powers and duties." There are 25 Sub Sections of Sec. 5, which detail "the powers, duties and functions func-tions of the commission." This is the section of the Land Use Act that gives the commission control of all the land in the State of Utah, including Indian land, Federal and public lands. (Sec. 5, Sub Sec. 1-H) "The recognition and consideration of the planning activities of interstate in-terstate agencies inasmuch as such activities relate to land use. The land use planning activities ac-tivities of multi-county associations assoc-iations and local governments, the land use planning process for Indian reservations and other oth-er tribal lands and the land use planning activities of Federal and public land management agencies." Could this mean that all a-greements a-greements and treaties with the Indians would not be honored? Note: Mr. Reay also spoke out against the following sections: sec-tions: Sub Sec. 5, Sec. 1 dealing with the commission formulating formulat-ing a Comprehensive State Land Use Plan. Also Sec. 5, Sub Sec. 1-D giving the commission com-mission power to give technical technic-al assistance and training programs pro-grams for agencies and local governments. He also spoke against the Commission implementing the plans as developed, more specifically spec-ifically that they would act as act as lord and master over the whole project. He also spoke out against the enormous amount of planing plan-ing that can be done, and he expects it to raise the tax base on all property within the state of Utah to Pay for this planning. plan-ning. : He said that because of Sec. 5, Sec. 2-E which designates areas of greater than local concern con-cern that it is his opinion that the commission would have unlimited un-limited control over almost all aspects of our daily lives. This could include buildings used as religious structures of all religions, re-ligions, and include major hospitals, hos-pitals, museums, etc. He is against the commission commiss-ion formulating plans to receive, re-ceive, allocate and dispurse funds made available to the state under Federal land use legislation. ' Mr. Reay is against the commission com-mission having power to withhold with-hold any monies until all plans conform to the Utah State Land Use Plan. He says the commission would have power to write the plan, handle and determine how the money is to be spent, and into which area it is to go. He follows his party's line of thought, in saying that the plan would tie the commission and its planning under the fed eral government (Sec. 5 Sub. Sec. 1-F). ' ; i He says that the commission should not be a permanent thing, but that in Sec. 7, Sub Sec. 1-1-C, recommendations for permanent housing of the commission are made, and he thinks it was intended to be a permanent commission from the beginning. In closing he says he hopes the general public will not be taken in by such a piece of legislation. We will vote our-self our-self in to a form of slavery and it will be our own fault. |
