Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 [12] 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Free Town Project (Floating Islands for Real)  (Read 81580 times)


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #165 on: May 23, 2011, 07:47:00 pm »

Watch out for special finance districts etc coming to NH, like everywhere else, apparently!

Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area (SLVLESA)

From the SLVLESA website, under the “About the SLVLESA” section, it states:
Mission - The sole purpose of the Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service Area (SLVLESA) is to provide funding for police services in the unincorporated areas of Salt Lake County. The SLVLESA does not provide police service. Instead, it forwards revenues to the Unified Police Department (UPD), which provides law enforcement services to the unincorporated County. The UPD is responsible for all police operations.
- Leadership - The SLVLESA was created by unanimous vote of the Salt Lake County Council (not the voting public). The Council appointed Jim Bradley, Michael Jensen, and Mayor Peter Corroon to serve as the service area trustees. Councilman Bradley serves as the chair.
** This SLVLESA Special Financing District and its self-appointed council, being created without the consent or approval of any of the home or business owners within these incorporated or unincorporated sections of the county, literally, unconstitutionally, and unabashedly forced these private land, home, and business owners to become a part of this Special Financing District.
** To be clear, the county council and county mayor created this 4-person council (a special district within the main UPD private corporation), which has no law enforcement authority and does not provide police services, and appointed themselves as its trustees and chairman. They created a fake corporate city (a corporate veil), making themselves the administrators (slave-masters). This would be no different than a king making your unincorporated town or village a part of his kingdom, and then assigning a council (an oligarchy) and tax collectors (city police) to force you to pay for his majesty’s protection.

The “NBS” website at ( – which is the out of state, private, non-governmental company handling Salt Lake County’s SLVLESA – states that:
- Special Financing Districts (“SFD’s”) include a wide variety of assessment-based, special tax, and other types of parcel charges such as:
    Assessment Districts
    Business Improvement Districts (BID)
    Community Facilities Districts (CFD)
    Connection Fee Financing
    Fire and Other Special Purpose Taxes
    Local Improvement Districts (LID)
    Maintenance Districts
    Miscellaneous Charges
    Parcel Loans
    Special Tax Districts
** Excerpted from a “William Blair & Company” brochure entitled “Special Tax District Financing – A Guide to Funding Infrastructure Through Land-Secured Bonds”, this Chicago company might give us some insight as to what is actually happening in districts across the country like the SLVLESA:
- This article sets out the basic concepts underlying land-secured municipal finance and how it can be used effectively by municipalities, home builders, and developers.
- Land-secured bonds are used to finance the basic public infrastructure required for both new development and existing communities. Most often, these bonds are issued through-or for the benefit of-special tax districts. The bonds generally are non-rated and exempt from federal income taxes…
** Now, I want you to pay special attention to this next part. For this above all else reveals the true nature of your private, corporate municipal “government”. And it proves without a doubt that you, the people, are not the owner of your land, your home, or your property.
- The brochure continues:
- Owners of properties that benefit from the bond-funded infrastructure agree to a lien on their homes (or commercial property) that is paid off over time through an annual special tax or assessment. That tax or assessment is used to pay debt service on the bonds, which are secured further by the underlying taxed or assessed property as collateral. The special tax or assessment constitutes a senior lien on the property, meaning it is superior to private liens such as construction or mortgage loans.
- Land-secured bonds are used to finance many types of public infrastructure. For example, for transportation, bond proceeds can fund streets, sidewalks, traffic signals, highway interchanges, public parking, public landscaping, and street lights. For utilities and related infrastructure, the bonds can fund water supply, storage, treatment, and distribution facilities; wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities; and storm drain systems. For economic development, the bonds can finance public infrastructure associated with shopping centers, business parks, and industrial parks. In addition, land-secured municipal bonds can fund flood control, recreational facilities, parks, and open space. What constitutes an eligible project is subject to specific state statutes, but in many locales the possibilities are expansive.
** In short, land-secured bond financing can be used to fund the cost of public infrastructure for almost every kind of real estate development: existing urban and suburban neighborhoods, new master-planned communities, local and regional commercial districts, retail malls, big-box commercial centers, office and business parks, industrial complexes, redevelopment project areas, affordable-housing projects, and military bases being converted to civilian use.
** In various states, a voter referendum is required to raise property taxes. This makes it difficult for local governments to cost-effectively finance new projects and existing infrastructure upgrades when they are needed… Consequently, a cash-flow mismatch exists between the up-front costs of public projects and generation of tax revenue. To fill this gap, land-secured bond financing was created so governments can fund infrastructure directly and developers can fund the public-use components of new neighborhoods before the improvements are conveyed to municipalities.
** In other words… these bonds are created to bypass the lawful voting procedure that would otherwise be required of the people to raise property taxes. This is literally “taxation without representation”.
- It continues:

- Land-secured bonds generally are not rated by the rating agencies because they are considered riskier than other municipal bonds and are unlikely to receive investment-grade ratings. As home-builders have come to understand, however, as long as all goes according to plan, the risks lessen over time. Risks are highest as development begins and the project is still dirt’ risk then declines as the project reaches its full potential, builds out, and establishes a diversified tax base with a record of special tax or assessment payments. The annual tax or assessment levy is generally part of the owner’s property tax bill so payment can be routine.
- The creative use of land-secured municipal financing through special tax and special assessment districts offers an opportunity for home-builders and real estate developers to partner with local governments to bring new development to fruition.
- (Source Link [doesn't work, but might be findable]:…/WilliamBlair-SpecialTaxDistrictFinancing.pdf)
** I am guessing that this answers the question as to why cities and counties across the country are building new housing, strip-malls, mega shopping centers, and business complexes all over the place in “planned communities”, while empty businesses and homes stockpile in the rest of the cities and counties as banks continue their siege of foreclosures on the clueless people.
** The more buildings government builds, the more taxation can be brought into the government Special Financing District!

* There's quite a bit more to the article, including evidence from CAFRs that the county has the funds to pay for services without raising taxes or requiring special taxes etc.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2011, 07:57:05 pm by Luck »


  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3659
  • Evil prevails when good men don't vote Libertarian
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #166 on: May 23, 2011, 08:00:55 pm »

The Project is to move 20,000 people within 5 years of getting 20,000 people to agree.

Do we have 20,000 people yet?

Then why are we still talking about this?

That was what we originally agreed to, but only if the FSP hit 20,000 by, I think, 2006.  The original Statement of Intent is meaningless, now.

I don't care if we get 20,000 for the state, as long as we get over 2,000 political activists and another 8-10 political activists for Seabrook.
If you are interested in putting together an IT-creative firm to help provide jobs for liberty folks in the future, send me a Personal Message.
"The Free State Project is an agreement among 20,000 pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire, where they will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of government is the protection of life, liberty, and property."


  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
Re: Free Town Project [Update: Prevent Special Finance Districts etc]
« Reply #167 on: May 24, 2011, 12:54:01 pm »



  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #168 on: January 17, 2012, 09:40:15 pm »

When, Where, How to Get a Free Town
How: Learn the Law from and get land patents, using their info, and prosecute corrupt public servants. Entice public servants to join and .
When: ASAP.
Where: Small towns and small counties.
In NH, these are small towns that have no zoning laws:
Lempster & maybe Washington [in Sullivan County]
Chatham [in Carroll County]
Ellsworth & Grafton [in Grafton County]
Clarksville, Errol and Stark [in Coos County]
These are other small towns that do have zoning laws, but, being small, may be agreeable to removing them:
Roxbury [in Cheshire County]
Sharon & Windsor [in Hillsborough County]
Hart's Location [in Carroll County]
Benton, Dorcester, Easton, Orange & Waterville [in Grafton County]
Dummer, Randolf & Shelbyville [in Coos County]
The smallest southerly county is Sullivan with 42,000 pop.
The smallest NH county is Coos in the far north with 29,000 pop.
Below it is Carroll with 45,000 pop.
And adjacent to Carroll is Grafton County with 72,000 pop.
For those who can move, those seem to be the most promising for becoming Free Towns and Counties soonest.
For those who can't move, we can still get land patents and collaborate to get into public office.
Once in office we should try to promote return to Constitutional principles, land patents, common law courts etc.

Anything else?
« Last Edit: January 17, 2012, 10:22:22 pm by Luck »


  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #169 on: February 20, 2012, 10:54:27 pm »

What's all this about Grafton? It definitely makes me rethink moving to Manchester if there's something like that going on out there.

Ron Helwig

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
    • Shire Silver
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #170 on: February 21, 2012, 10:02:59 am »

What's all this about Grafton? It definitely makes me rethink moving to Manchester if there's something like that going on out there.

Grafton is a great small town with a relatively large number of FreeStaters. There's a lot going on, but its mostly low key family and farm type stuff.

Since I moved to New Hampshire I've lived in Newport, Hampton Beach, Deerfield, Henniker, Manchester, Grafton, and now Seabrook. They're all great places, but they all have different advantages and lifestyles.
Are you a Next 1000 liberty activist?

Rebuild the precious metal economy with Shire Silver

tom ploszaj

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #171 on: February 21, 2012, 03:41:55 pm »

Hi you can always drop me a note about Grafton questions and what you are interested in.  Manchester and Grafton may be at the opposite ends of the social spectrum, Grafton being a rural area with a one store/deli/gas business.  Grafton is the host of Burning Porcupine, NHJury , The Peaceful Assembly Church and where many  liberty persons are involved in local and state politics and  small endeavors.


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project (New Video)
« Reply #172 on: March 13, 2012, 09:32:13 pm »

* Dave Ridley did this video for me for the Free Town Project:
* Any comments?


  • Guest
Re: Free Town Project. (New Video)
« Reply #173 on: March 19, 2012, 06:42:32 am »

The Saba Cooperative was mentioned in the video.  Here is the website.


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project. (Update: Links)
« Reply #175 on: August 27, 2012, 07:44:27 pm »

* Jakubowski has an interesting plan for free towns. He's working on open source farm and factory tech for sustainable small and larger towns. For links, see


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project (Barrington, Officially a Free Town)
« Reply #176 on: August 18, 2016, 12:39:48 am »

Free Town Project (Ready to Make Free Towns Official)

I'm reviving this thread because important new information has come to my attention and because there seems to be a lot of useful info in the thread.

Barrington and Rochester were mentioned earlier in this thread as places where Free Staters were residing a few years ago. It so happens that Barrington has apparently already adopted an ordinance that recognizes the right of all communities to self-government, superior to state, national and global law, except for civil rights, which are superior to all other law.

So let me show you highlights of Barrington's ordinance, which was first drafted with help from , i.e. Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund. Their help is free, and seems very competent, so I recommend that Free Staters get their help in drafting Bills of Rights ordinances etc for other NH towns where you live. Like us, they want to establish local self-government rights.

Barrington, Becoming a Free Town! I don't know if this is just a proposed ordinance, or if it was actually voted for. If Barrington did not make the ordinance official, that's okay, because there are other NH communities that do seem to have made similar ordinances official. I think Barnstead is one of them. In any event, here's Barrington's possible ordinance. I'll try to post other similar ordinances etc of other communities later.

Barrington's Community Bill of Rights Ordinance No. 2014



Whereas, this community finds that commercial resource extraction and toxic waste disposal are economically and environmentally unsustainable, in that they damage property values and the natural environment, place the health of residents at risk, threaten the quality of the natural water systems within the Town, while failing to provide real benefits to the people of this community; and

Whereas, this community finds that commercial resource extraction and toxic waste disposal violate the rights of Barrington residents, including our right to make decisions about what happens to the places where we live; and

Whereas, this community finds that a change in the Town of Barrington’s zoning ordinance in March, 2005 – which allows certain commercial resource extraction to occur - places the environment at risk and violates the rights of residents; and

Whereas, current environmental laws allow state-chartered corporations to inflict damage on local water systems that cannot be reversed, violating the rights of residents to protect their community and the rights of ecosystems to exist; and

Whereas, private corporations engaged in resource extraction and toxic waste disposal are wrongly recognized by the federal and state government as having more “rights” than the people who live in our community, and that recognition of corporate “rights” is therefore, a denial of the rights of the residents of Barrington; and

Whereas, such a denial violates the New Hampshire Constitution’s recognition that “all government of right originates from the people, is founded in consent and instituted for the general good;” and the Declaration of Independence’s recognition that governments are instituted to secure and protect the rights of people and communities;

Therefore, We the People of Barrington hereby adopt this Community Bill of Rights Ordinance.

Section 1 – Definitions
(a) “Corporations” ... (b) “Ecosystem” ... (c) “Resource extraction” ... (d) “Toxic waste” ... (e) “Toxic waste disposal ” or “disposal of toxic waste” ...

Section 2 - Statements of Law – A Local Bill of Rights
(a) Right to Access Water. All residents and ecosystems in Barrington possess a right to sustainably access, use, consume, and preserve water drawn from natural water cycles that provide water necessary to sustain life within the Town.
(b) Right to Clean Air. All residents and ecosystems of the town of Barrington possess a right to clean air untainted by toxins, carcinogens, particulates and other substances known to cause harm to health.
(c) Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of Home. Residents of Barrington possess a right to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes, free from interference, intrusion, nuisances or impediments to access and occupation.
(d) Rights of Ecosystems. Ecosystems, including but not limited to, wetlands, streams, rivers, aquifers, and other water systems, possess rights to exist and flourish within the Town of Barrington. Residents of the Town shall possess legal standing to enforce those rights on behalf of those ecosystems.
(e) Right to Scenic Preservation. All residents of the Town of Barrington possess a right to protect and preserve the scenic, historic and aesthetic values of the town, including clean air, pure water, healthy soil, and unspoiled vistas that provide the foundation for a rural quality of life and economic sustainability for local businesses. Residents and local representatives have the authority to enact and enforce legislation that guarantees the exercise of local Self-government that is protective of these rights.
(f) Right to Self-Government. All residents of Barrington possess the right to a form of governance where they live which recognizes that all power is inherent in the people, and that all free governments are founded on the people’s authority and consent. Use of the “Town of Barrington” municipal corporation by the sovereign people shall not be deemed, by any authority, to eliminate or reduce that Self-governing authority.
(g) Rights as Self-Executing. All rights delineated and secured by this ordinance are inherent, fundamental, and inalienable, and shall be Self-executing and enforceable against both private and public actors.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2016, 01:19:51 am by Luck »


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project. (Barrington, a Free Town Already)
« Reply #177 on: August 18, 2016, 01:03:40 am »

(Cont. from previous post)

Section 3 — Statements of Law – Prohibitions Necessary to Secure Bill of Rights’ Protections
(a) It shall be unlawful within the Town of Barrington for a corporation, or any person using a corporation, to engage in commercial resource extraction or the disposal of toxic waste.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any corporation or government to violate the rights recognized and secured by this Ordinance.
(c) No permit, license, privilege, charter, or other authority issued by any State or federal entity which would violate the prohibitions of this Ordinance and deprive any Town resident of any rights secured by this Ordinance, the New Hampshire Constitution, the United States Constitution, or other laws, shall be deemed valid within the Town of Barrington.

Section 4 — Exceptions. ... (a) Utility corporations ... (b) Corporations operating under valid and express contractual provisions ... (c) The City of Rochester … (d) Sand or gravel extraction ....

Section 5 — Enforcement
(a) Any corporation that violates any prohibition of this Ordinance shall be guilty of an offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be sentenced to pay the maximum fine allowable under State law for that violation. Each day or portion thereof, and violation of each section of this Ordinance, shall count as separate violations.
(b) The Town of Barrington may enforce this Ordinance through an action in equity brought in any court possessing jurisdiction over activities occurring within the Town of Barrington. In such an action, the Town of Barrington shall be entitled to recover all costs of litigation, including, without limitation, expert and attorney’s fees.
(c) Any Town resident shall have the authority to enforce this Ordinance through an action in equity brought in any court possessing jurisdiction over activities occurring within the Town of Barrington. In such an action, the resident shall be entitled to recover all costs of litigation, including, without limitation, expert and attorney’s fees.
(d) Any person who brings an action to secure the rights of ecosystems shall bring that action in the name of the ecosystem in any court possessing jurisdiction over activities occurring within the Town of Barrington. Damages shall be measured by the cost of restoring the ecosystem to its state before the injury, and shall be paid to the Town of Barrington to be used exclusively for the full and complete restoration of the ecosystem.

Section 6 – Corporate Powers
(a) Corporations and other business entities which violate this Ordinance, or which seek to violate this Ordinance, shall not be deemed to be “persons,” nor possess any other legal rights, privileges, powers, or protections which would interfere with the enforcement of rights or prohibitions enumerated by this Ordinance. Such powers shall include the authority to assert state or federal preemptive laws in an attempt to overturn this Ordinance, and the authority to assert that the people of the Town lack the authority to adopt this Ordinance.
(b) All laws adopted by the legislature of the State of New Hampshire, rules adopted by any State agency, and permits issued by any State agency, shall be the law of the Town of Barrington only to the extent that they do not violate this Ordinance.

Section 7 — Effective Date and Existing Permit holders ...

Section 8 — People’s Right to Self-Government
Use of the courts or the legislature to attempt to overturn the provisions of this Ordinance shall require community meetings focused on changes to Town government that would insulate the Town from interference with the right of residents to local self-government. [This means potentially secession!]

Section 9 – New Hampshire Constitutional Changes. The people of the Town of Barrington call for amendment of the New Hampshire Constitution to secure within it explicitly a community right to local Self-government free from preemption by State government. The people of Barrington also call for a state constitutional amendment and federal constitutional changes that explicitly elevate community rights above corporate property rights, and that recognizes the rights of nature enforceable by the residents of a community.

Section 10 — Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. ...

Section 11 --- Repealer. ...

ENACTED AND ORDAINED this _____ day of _____, 2014, by the Town of Barrington, in Strafford County, New Hampshire. By: _____
« Last Edit: October 05, 2018, 12:07:14 am by Luck »


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project. (Barrington, a Free Town Already?)
« Reply #178 on: November 21, 2017, 02:39:26 pm »

Free Towns Require Declarations of Independence and of Community Rights

Barrington started the process as explained in previous post above.


NH Rep Ellen Read recently sponsored CACR19, a state constitutional amendment that would guarantee local community rights


New Hampshire Community Rights Network

Why we must amend the NH Constitution

Ohio Community Rights Action Example

Pennsylvania Community Rights Action Example


  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3127
Re: Free Town Project
« Reply #179 on: March 04, 2018, 04:31:23 pm »


NH Measure would secure the right of local community self-government

Plymouth, NH, Voters Adopt Community Rights Sustainable Energy Future Ordinance

I think Team Law has info on Land Patents

STATES' REQUIREMENTS TO START A VILLAGE/TOWN (# Residents; V=voters; o=land owners; h = houses)
Listed from least to most required residents
UT 1 (or 100?) ----- ND 1 (<4SQMI=>100/SQMI?) ----- OR 1 (150?) ----- NM 1o or200V (150=1/A?) ----- SC 1 (1=>300/SQMI...?) ----- PA 1 ----- AL 1 (300?) ----- NV 5V (250V?) ----- OK 25V ----- WI 25o (300or3000?) ----- SD 100or30V ----- VT 30h ----- CO 40Vor150o ----- IN 50o ----- NE 100 ----- WV 100=<1SQMI,500/SQMI=>1SQMI ----- ID 126V ----- MI 150=>100/SQMI (250/.75SQMI?) ----- AR 200V (20V) ----- GA 200 ----- IL 200 ----- TX 201 ----- KY 300 ----- MD 300=60V ----- MT 300 (=500/SQMI?) ----- MS 300+1SQMI ----- LA 200 (300?) ----- KS 300=50V ----- MO 500 ----- TN 500... ----- WY 500=<3SQMI ----- CA 500V ----- NY 500=100/SQMI ----- VA 1000 ----- AZ 1500 ----- WA (300or3000?) ----- FL 5000 ----- MA 12000 ----- OH 1600=800/SQMI=$3500

States that require unspecified government approval:
CT 1 APPROV<LEG ----- DE 1 APPROV<LEG ----- ME 1 APPROV<LEG ----- NH 1 APPROV<LEG ----- NJ 1 APPROV<LEG ----- NC 1 APPROV<LEG ----- RI 1 APPROV<LEG ----- AK 1 APPROV<D CMTY AFFAIRS ----- IA 1 APPROV<CY DEV BD ----- MN 1 APPROV<MUNI BD ----- DC (can't do) ----- HI (can't do)

How do you start your own town?
_Get to know the neighbors. Though each state has its own rules on "municipal incorporation," in general you'll need to get 51 percent of the eligible voters in the area to go along with you. (It's easiest to start a town from scratch, as opposed to by secession; most upstarts begin as "unincorporated communities" within a larger county.) In 2000, Clark hired a surveyor to draw up boundaries for a town that would be a little bigger than a square mile and would include 254 people—of whom only 65 were registered to vote. To found Clark, Texas, he had to convince only a few dozen neighbors it was a good idea.
_To incorporate a town, you'll need a lawyer who can handle the paperwork. Once you've decided on where to put your town, the first step toward You-ville is to get a petition signed by some of the people who live there. In Texas, you'll need 10 percent of the voters. In Arkansas, you need to get 75 signatures, no matter how big your town is going to be.
_An application for forming a town includes the signed petition, a proposed name, and—in some cases—a proposed form of government. There are four basic town governments to choose from—mayor-council, council-manager, commission, or representative town meeting—but some states' laws limit your options depending on the size of your community. Once you complete your application, all you typically need is a "yes" vote from your neighbors and the approval of a county judge or state official. In some places, though, a town charter must be granted by vote of the state legislature.
_Depending on where you live, you may face certain restrictions on your right to incorporate. Your proposed town may need to have a minimum number of people, for example, or it may need to be a minimum distance from other towns and cities. The description of where it is should be very specific—for an example, take a look at the charter-specified boundaries of Danbury, Conn. And some states will expect your town to have a unique name, so think again if you wanted to use "Fairview" or "Midway."
An unincorporated community gets its services from the county without paying municipal taxes, so frivolous town-founding can be a bad idea. Why might you want to incorporate? First, you could be heading off annexation by a nearby city. The residents of what is now DISH, Texas were afraid of being annexed by Fort Worth. If their land had become part of the city, they'd have faced the high property taxes used to cover social services in less affluent areas. Second, unincorporated communities have very little control over what gets built in the area. But towns can control their own zoning—and thereby protect their property values.

Game: Monopoly; Rules: Everyone get an allowance; Invest in properties with luck; Pay property owners with bad luck; Take a turn in jail with bad luck; Go broke with bad luck; 1 player get everyone's money with good luck.

Game: Liberal-Libertarian Utopia; Rules: Founders start Town with x Residents; Residents own equal parts of town land; Residents rent lands to businesses; Residents own shares of businesses; Residents receive dividends from bank or businesses; Workers receive salaries from businesses; Residents buy goods & services from businesses; Residents own Bank business; Bank create money as needed to pay Residents dividends; Residents hire bank manager & clerks to create money for loans & to pay dividends; Residents own adjacent land to grow new separate town/s; All Residents prosper.

« Last Edit: March 07, 2018, 10:01:53 am by Luck »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 [12] 13   Go Up