Help strengthen alternative media by visiting our supporters

Sheepdog Supplies

Project 7B Filled with Red Flags for Bonner County

Approximately 2/3 of the county is already unavailable to the public.

project 7b

Project 7B Filled with Red Flags for Bonner County

by Shari Dovale

I was just sent this document. It is a report called “Growth,  Land  Use,  and  Planning  in  Bonner  County,  Idaho.” This is the result of a $12,000 grant from University of Utah’s law school . I had to wonder how talking to 30 people could cost so much money and why the University of Utah law school was interested in North Idaho?

It is being promoted by a new group of organizers called Project 7B.

Admittedly, I have not had time to delve deeply into it, but I intend to do so. I did peruse the document and noted several passages that were of concern to me.

Here are my first thoughts.

A couple of – specialists – in “Metropolitan Planning” from the University of Utah came to rural Bonner County to discuss how to address environmental and public policy. They began by selecting 30 specific people to interview and on which to base their “study.”

In 2014, the listed population for Bonner County was 41,585 (28% urban, 72% rural). Therefore, they spoke to less than 0.1% of the population, with few, if any, of them being in the majority “rural” based on their statements in the report.

Page 3:

During  the  summer  and  fall  of  2016,  Environmental  Dispute  Resolution  Program  staff  conducted  in-­‐depth  confidential  interviews  with  30  individuals  representing  a  diverse  range  of  stakeholder  groups  in  Bonner  County,  Idaho

Page 12:

A  number  of interviewees  said there  is  a  faction  of  very conservative  and  very  pro-­‐private  property  and  anti-­‐regulation  folks  residing  in  Bonner  County,  and  that  more  people  with  this  ideological  leaning  are moving  into  the  area.  They  felt  this  group  tends  to  be  very  politically  active  and  divisive,  and  expressed  concern  that  the  growing  presence  of  this  contingent  is  causing  additional  tension  in  Bonner  County.

This tells me that this is an attempt at manipulating public policy on land use and private property in Bonner County. They want people to believe that they have a consensus of the population, with the exception of a few ‘extremists.’

Yet, they continue to repeat their main concerns:

Page 17:

As noted above, multiple interviewees expressed concern about increasingly  divisive  politics  at  the  local  and  national  level, and  the  effect  this  seems  to  be  having  on  community  character  and  local decision-­‐making

They have come down hard on the County Commissioners and suggest the current policy be changed BACK to previous standards. This tells me that there could be some ‘disgruntled’ employees within their less-than-0.1% demographic discussions.

There appear to be intentions to alter policy on water rights, as well.

Page 7:

However,  they  differed  in  their  perspectives  about  the  extent  to  which recent  changes  in  county  land  use  planning, regulations, and permitting  requirements  presented  a  risk  to  water  quality.  They  also held  differing perspectives  regarding the  role  that  government planning  and  regulation  should  play  in  protecting  water quality  and  water  bodies

This report is obviously a part of Agenda 21/2030. It is interesting that their 30 interviewees are right on board with the talking points:

Page 8:

It  is  also  important  to  note  that  interviewees  generally  steered  away  from  using  the  term “smart  growth,”  indicating  that  term  has  developed  a negative  stigma  that  might  get  in  the  way  of  productive  conversation about  how  to  achieve  “good  growth”  and  avoid  “bad  growth”

Page 10:

…streamlining  should  not  come  at  the  expense  of  achieving  the  intended goals  of  government  departments,  programs,  and  policies.

Page 11:

 …some  interviewees  identified the  meaning  of  “freedom”  and  “whose freedom  to  do  what”  as  points of tension.  For  example, interviewees  noted  that  some  people  in  the  county  seem  to prioritize  the  freedom  to  do  what  they  want  on  their  properties  and/or to  carry  guns,  whereas  others  prioritize  the  freedom  to  move  around  freely  and/or to  not  feel  threatened  by  other  community  members carrying  guns.

As I said in the beginning, this was recently sent to me and I have not gone through it in depth. However, I see multiple red flags within Project 7B, and I am concerned that this will slip through the cracks and the NWO Progressives will use this as their tool to further their agenda.

Bonner County is already very low in private land ownership. It is estimated that less than 15% of this county is privately owned, and approximately 2/3 of the county is already unavailable to the public.

The red flags suggest that we could easily lose more of our lands.


Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here:


2 Comments on Project 7B Filled with Red Flags for Bonner County

  1. I agree whole-heartedly with the author’s comments and the subsequent editorial comment offered by Ms. Ollie, a fellow student of (CSG). The desired result of 7B’s efforts is to effect agenda 2030 in Bonner County through the existing planning and zoning structure. It is much more than a foot in the door. Inconspicuous compromise to current political structure is dangerous and a progressive leftist goal. I can not urge readers enough…, go to and take the Delphi-technique survey. Scrolling through the survey you’ll see leftist terminology. Tell them in the open answer boxes that we want neither regionalization or lobbyist outsiders attempting to influence our local politics. Tell them their scheme is transparent and unwelcome.

  2. First off, one has to wonder if this is about some sort of regional planning/government. It’s an important topic as erasing the political boundaries established by our Founding Fathers is dangerous. We have vertical and horizontal design and separation for a reason. Built in is a system of checks and balances. For example, state government has a legislative, executive, and judicial branch. However regional governments do not have this separation or the checks and balances that come with. Classes offered by the Center for Self Governance really brought this home. The book “Regional Factors in National Planning” is an eye opener.

Comments are closed.