The League of Kentucky Property Owners
Annual Meeting
Thursday, September 17, 1998
Cash Bar/informal reception starts at 6:30 P.M.
The General Meeting begins at 7:00 P.M.
at the Triple Crown Clubhouse

Featured Guest Speaker:
Emanuel McLittle from Selma, Oregon

Emanuel McLittle is an accomplished editor/publisher and former psychologist. Emanuel's success is the result of his personal commitment and determination. By struggle and hard work alone, McLittle climbed out of the Detroit slums into a position of national respect, at least in the minds of the country's leading thinkers. Emanuel cannot be accused of timidity - in fact he is often quite blunt - but his intellectual reasoning cuts to the issue.

Emanuel is a long time associate of Professor Walter Williams, and, although black, he resents being called "African-American." He openly states that he is most happy being an American, and AMERICAN he is! His twenty years of social and political analysis have earned him the reputation of "one of the nation's foremost advocates of restoring property rights."

Mr. McLittle's story is interesting and inspiring to hear. His knowledge of the American form of government - as intended by our founders - is impressive and educational. His respect for the value of property rights is complemented by his own personal struggle for success. But by far the most important of all, is his sincerity. He has willingly risked his property to fund a defense and promotion to our American Liberties.

Boone's County's 200th Anniversary Celebration

Amid the stifling and sticky conditions of Saturday, June 20, 1998, thousands turned out for Boone County's 200th anniversary celebration. The celebration -- coined "BIG PARTY" by the event's organizers -- had a lot to offer the folks in attendance. Among the payoffs for braving the heat were twenty five cent ... well, "everythings": hot dogs; BB-Q; chili; bean soup with corn bread; soft drinks (12 oz!); ice cream bars; and much more! This was one of the few parties where giving your child a couple of bucks was generous (a considerable benefit if - like me - you are blessed with several children).

In spite of all the party had to offer: food, fireworks, music, and even sky-divers, the most notable feature of the event -- from our perspective at least -- was the presence of the League. Thanks to many of our members who volunteered generously, the League was well represented indeed! Over thirty six members offered their services at not only the League's booth, but greatly assisted the event's coordinators in making the "BIG PARTY" a success. It is also worthy of mention that each volunteer was representing the League by wearing an attractive hat with our name on it.

Even more important than the example of our members -- the "good guys" in green hats -- is the fact that the League distributed thousands of pieces of literature. The League offered the Preamble and Bill of Rights from the Kentucky Constitution, attractively printed on parchment, scrolled and tied with a ribbon the color of our state flag. The parchment additionally contained the League's Statement of Purpose and Principle and membership application. Because of the overwhelming interest, we also gave out hundreds of past newsletters -- and hundreds of people signed up for more information!

Thanks to our members' participation, the day was truly successful for the League. For the most part, the success is due to the creative ideas, generous investment of time and the dedication of Larry Callahan, the League's Program Committee Vice

Chairman, who coordinated the League's efforts in this endeavor. In turn, Larry admits the success is due to the many volunteers who supported him in this venture. In addition to the work of Larry and his wife, Lynette, and on behalf of the League, I want to thank each of the following volunteers who were so considerate and gave their assistance:

Ed Bessler
Families of: Dan, Mike & Steve Brueggemann
Juanita Bunger
Connie Drivette
Cathy Flaig
Steve & Linda Flaig
Carl Frye
Paul Kahmann
Robert Kirby, Sr.
Robert Klensch
David Kuchle
Families of: Bernie, Bill & Joe Kunkel
Dennis MacDonald
Ed Moorehead
Larry Pieper
Mabel Roberts
Don Stites
Bernie Wessels

Along with the above volunteers, thanks also to the many members who were present at the event and gave us their support. Not only did we receive excellent public exposure, but the League helped the county considerably by being perhaps the most depended upon group of volunteers -- of which there was a shortage. The League is already known for its commitment to promoting respect for property rights, and our coming to the assistance of Boone County with volunteers demonstrates our good will. Participation of this scale is all that is needed to convert our goals into accomplishments!

Rick Brueggemann, President

Hage v. United States

We are just two months away from the long anticipated trial in Hage v. United States. The trial should begin as scheduled on September 28, 1998 in Reno, Nevada.

With a ruling to follow the trial, property owners across America are very close to resolution in this pivotal case. And, if successful, the strategy used for the past 50
years by environmentalists will finally be derailed. Environmentalists will have to pay for property which in the past they have been able to steal.

Although some expect this case to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, the decision made by the Claims Court after trial will be current law until and if ever that ruling is overturned. If the court rules in our favor, that will be the law of the land, and property owners will have a clear remedy to protect their property rights.
-Stewards of the Range

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Rulemaking Regarding Wetlands

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently struck down a 1993 United States Army Corps of Engineers' regulation that governed wetlands on the basis that they "could affect" interstate commerce. In United States v. Wilson the defendant was convicted of criminal violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for knowingly discharging fill material and excavated dirt into wetlands without a permit. On appeal, the court of appeals reversed the district court's decision, holding that the Army Corps of Engineers exceeded its authority. The court found that the Army Corps' rulemaking exceeded its authority by defining "waters of the United States" to include "all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, mud flats, sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate of foreign commerce." The court of appeals found the regulation objectionable because it neither required that the regulated activity have a substantial effect on interstate commerce nor that the covered waters have any sort of nexus with navigable or interstate waters. The court also noted that, if the regulation were a statute, it would appear to be unconstitutional in that it exceeded congressional authority under the Commerce Clause.

This case could have significant impact on the Army Corps' 404 permitting program and a substantial number of wetlands. In particular, wetlands that are isolated and removed from navigable waters and coastal areas may not be covered and, therefore, not subject to protection.

-David A. Owen, GDM 4 Law Letter

Straight Talk from a US Rep from Texas Respect for Property Rights Necessary for Freedom

It is the most basic of all our rights. In a society which has the proper focus, many of the problems we face today become non-issues. Over the last half-century, there has been a declared war on these most fundamental of rights: property rights.

Some try to make this an issue of simply pro-property rights versus pro-environmentalism. In reality, the issue is much, much deeper. In fact, how we look at property rights is a most basic foundation of our liberty.

When one has a proper respect for property rights, environmental concerns go away. In a society that respects the property of others, it is cause for legal action if someone pollutes your land, or the water coming across your property, or the air which floats above it. With a proper respect for private property, people can and should be allowed to do whatever they would like with their land - barring any restrictions they agreed to when they purchased the land - up until the point that their actions physically affect their neighbors.

So while a land owner may choose to build a big factory on his land, he must be very careful to ensure that no harm comes to adjacent property owners, or he will face the unmitigated wrath of those neighbors. In the past, big businesses often colluded with government to allow them to pollute their neighbors land, leaving the adjacent owners with devalued property and no recourse.

But the issue is so much more broad than simply concerns over the protection of the environment. Much has been done in the name of "environmentalism" which in reality has little to do with clean air and water, and everything to do with power and control.

For the degree of freedom we enjoy our own property - whether it is a thousand-acre farm or a single-family dwelling lot in a town or city - is a strong measure of the liberty in a society.

Our respect for private property goes to the root of our other freedoms: freedom of speech, of religion, to own weapons, to gather peaceably, and on. Much is made that one should not "yell fire in a crowded theater." And while that is true in a moral sense, it is equally true that the property owner should have the right to disallow people from saying or doing anything in their theater, or even being there in the first place. But today the government dictates not only how we can use the land, but in many cases forces us to allow others to use our property in ways to which we object.

Freedom only exists where there is complete respect for rights of property ownership. When we go to another person's land, or home, or business, we should expect to be bound by their rules of conduct. And they should be free to protect their property and family as they see fit.

Increasingly, though, the government is usurping our property rights, in one fashion or another. It is fair to say that we are in a sense losing true property ownership. In many cases, the government prevents us from doing with our property what we would like, essentially making the land worthless. Yet government still manages to tax us at rates which rival rent for the pleasure of being forbidden from using the land. Some of the laws are ostensibly "environmental" in nature, others reflect a desire for "fairness," while still others make claims of simply being "good for everyone." While these laws may be good for the bi-government bureaucrats, they are bad for almost everyone else. In fact, these laws amount to regulatory takings, which are prohibited by our Constitution's Fifth Amendment.

Perhaps the most egregious assault occurs, though, at the death of a property owner. Instead of being able to leave the family estate to his heirs, the owner's survivors must instead sit down with the government and negotiate how to divide up the property. The family farm is an endangered species, not for a lack of profitability or interest, but because the taxes assessed by government at our death forces the family to sell off land just to pay the levy.

Our freedoms and liberties are only as secure as our property rights. This was the underlying assumption of our Founding Fathers, and a foundation we are in danger of cracking. Without a firm respect for property ownership, all our other rights are only so much as talk.

Ron Paul,
US Representative from Texas