California Cities Banning New Gas Stations

Democrats can never make the situation so awful that they will not deliberately make it worse. Their control of the federal government means skyrocketing gas prices because of the Biden Regime’s War on Oil. Their tighter control of California means that, pricey as gas is in the country as a whole (currently $4.61), it is pricier still in the Land of Fruits and Nuts (currently $5.99). The price will climb even higher after Democrats make the product scarcer by forbidding the construction of new gas stations:

Last year, Petaluma Councilwoman D’Lynda Fischer led the way to prohibiting new gas stations in her city of 60,000 people, the Los Angeles Times reported. …

This has since kicked off a movement among Californians to bring about more green energy policies by banning the building of future gas stations.

According to liberal ideology, forcing people to drive around all day looking for a gas station will improve the weather.

Since Petaluma’s decision, four other cities in the Bay Area have followed its example.

Now, even Los Angeles is considering a new proposal that is aimed at banning future construction of new gas stations, in attempt to reduce the use of gasoline overall, CBS News reported.

Los Angeles City Councilman Paul Koretz said that this proposal is just a “small step” towards helping the planet and won’t affect people that much.

On the contrary, it won’t affect the planet at all, but will make driving in Los Angeles even more nightmarish than it is already.

As Islamic armies poured out of Arabia to conquer the mainly Christian Middle East, subjugated populations were not allowed to build new churches — or even to repair existing ones. Libs appear to have learned from the totalitarian Muslims of the Dark Ages, with whom they have so much in common:

In his proposal, current gas stations would also be limited — no new pumps or repairs would be permitted. Only electric vehicle charging stations would be allowed.

In addition to being inefficient, extravagantly expensive, unreliable, and prone to bursting into flames, electric vehicles are worse for the environment than proper cars — confirming that envirotyranny is about tyranny, not the environment.

Whenever any legislative body makes rules/laws that inhibit the use of real property that a person purchased in good faith for the use intended-—That is called a “TAKING”.

Some N Calif Counties tried to restrict the various uses of rural property with limits on number of livestock-—Adequate fencing for such livestock/ and other such nonsense.

Nevada County got their rural residents in an uproar years ago with such moves. We beat them back & the real estate rules in effect WHEN properties were bought was thrown in their faces.

NO ONE was happy about building fencing/barns/shelters, etc. for horses only to be told later that having horses was going to be restricted.

I personally told the Board of Supes that the County had NO reluctance in issuing permits for such barns, etc., and charging for those permits, and then increasing the property taxes to reflect those structures......

Therefore, it was a TAKING to tell a lady who had built a 14 horse expensive barn on her 10 acres less than 6 years earlier that she could ONLY have 4 horses or some such.

I told them it was up to the Animal Control department to decide IF horses were ‘overcrowded’ & not properly cared for or not.

I also reminded them that the LARGEST DRAFT HORSE EVENT IN THE USA is held in Nevada County Fairgrounds in Grass Valley & the income from those visitors was an enormous part of the County budget.

THOSE BARNS held hundreds of LARGE BUDWEISER type animals for many days & were very densely occupied...without incident.

I told them to tour the many small & medium facilities in the County before they made rules they knew nothing about & that would lead to many lawsuits over “TAKING” that the County could be bankrupted over.

The crowd in the Supervisors auditorium was completely SRO & OVERFLOWING. People were outside—unable to get in due to capacity issues, and they were getting reports of what was happening.

At one point, the hippies who were Supes threatened to shut down the meeting & that didn’t FLY, either.

It got quite heated. I wasn’t going to back down. I had spent 2 years looking for property I could have my 4-—then 6—horses on & where I was on a dead end road for less traffic. I had spent 3 years taking down dead/ dying/ crippled/ damaged trees so I could build fences & paddocks. I COMPLETELY USED UP 7 chains on my Stihl chain saw & I am on my 13th GALLON of chain oil-—all used there.

I gave them HELL from every angle. Most persons in the audience didn’t know what a “TAKING” was-—By the end of 2 nights of arguing-—THEY ALL KNEW what “TAKING” was.

I told the newly hired idiot that came from Los Angeles where his greatest achievement was demanding 3 gallon toilets or smaller in every structure that he was NOT suitable for this position since he had NO RURAL or large animal husbandry background. He tried to explain himself & I told him to SHUT UP & sit down before he couldn’t sit down. People were very angry about the intrusion on their properties.

He had even red-tagged a pasture where MANZANITA was being removed & expensive fencing was being planned. He claimed the shrub was an endangered species-—which it was NOT. But—The man who had several VERY EXPENSIVE Thoroughbred mares ready to foal & NO barn to do it in wasn’t happy, either. He called all over the county seeking places his mares could foal at since his work was halted by the IDIOT. Many horse owners stepped up & helped.

The whole point is that a “TAKING” can be complex, but it is still a “TAKING” when a rule diminishes the usage/value of the property.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.