Michael Sauers

September 20, 2025

When the value or worth of an idea is counter to the interests of the majority, the idea has to be sequestered into muddy waters. Secrecy! Intimidation! Denial! This post is about strategies that government and industry uses to limit or completely block citizen participation. All are outrageous infringements on citizen rights.

Let’s begin with the fact that economic development is not a community endeavor. It is done by a handful of unelected people without significant input from the community at large. It is safe to assume that long before an industrial proposal or business idea is publicly announced it has been discussed by local/county/state officials and economic development agencies. Discussions/decisions regarding zoning, planning, regulations and financing may have occurred outside the public eye. That, in and of itself, is wrong. All local communities need to have regular community conversations about their economic futures.

So, let’s get specific. First on the list are non-disclosure agreements signed by government officials and others in order to attend an economic development presentation. These are foisted on elected officials and government appointees by industries, economic development groups/consulting firms and those who sign agree not to discuss anything referenced in the presentation. Obviously, these agreements are not in the public interest and may very well be unconstitutional.

Now, if an industry proposal is controversial and community pushback threatens it, a (SLAPP) Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation is often filed. This is a strategy meant to intimidate, censor and silence critics. They can be very expensive to defend against and serve to drain energy and resources from proposal opponents. This is nasty business and leaves a bad taste in the mouths of citizens as they tend to stifle debate.

Next, comes the heavy hand of eminent domain. This power, according to the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, is given to government to take private property and convert it into public use. Just compensation is required. EM has been bastardized to do the bidding of private business as in the case of natural gas pipelines. Private property owners are virtually forced to give up their land. While it is difficult to defeat, many land owners fight to keep their land.

Finally, there are times when communities learn that approved projects did not fully reveal all the consequences of their activities. Subsequently, they challenge the approvals granted by local, county and state governments. This is when they learn about the Doctrine of Administrative Finality. In essence, administrative finality keeps individuals and communities from challenging prior decisions unless new evidence is presented or there are significant changes in circumstances. Courts are reluctant to revisit these approved projects as they tend to reveal shoddy and embarrassing approvals and necessitate financial remedies. Both are difficult to adjudicate. Citizens are often left to accept bad decisions or pursue costly legal battles.

Along the way you may have noticed that there are billions of dollars in corporate welfare doled out every year. You may have also noticed that there are 0 funds for communities who are trying to learn/challenge/fight/approve proposed projects. I propose that a fund be set up so that communities can hire independent experts, do research, and hire lawyers to help them make an educated decision. Yes, defer that corporate welfare to citizens groups who are pummeled with large and obscene proposals that have the capacity to drastically change communities. Examples would be AI/Data/Crypto projects that require enormous amounts of water and electricity. We simply cannot rely on the corporate line we are fed!

Unfortunately, we cannot simply rely on our elected officials and government agencies. They are heavily lobbied and influenced by industry. They do all that they can to fast track permits and approvals and keep public participation to a minimum.