{"id":4531,"date":"2014-03-15T18:40:26","date_gmt":"2014-03-16T01:40:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/?p=4531"},"modified":"2014-03-15T19:26:57","modified_gmt":"2014-03-16T02:26:57","slug":"cloward-and-piven-takes-on-co-private-property","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/2014\/03\/cloward-and-piven-takes-on-co-private-property\/","title":{"rendered":"Cloward and Piven takes on CO private property"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Since 1876, the Colorado Constitution protected Colorado citizens from uncompensated property takings by the State of Colorado.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><strong>CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, ARTICLE II BILL OF RIGHTS &#8211; Colo. Const. Art. II, Section 15 (2013)<\/strong><br \/>\n<strong> Section 15. TAKING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE &#8211; COMPENSATION, HOW ASCERTAINED<\/strong><br \/>\nPrivate property shall not be taken or damaged, for public or private use, without just compensation. Such compensation shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners, of not less than three freeholders, or by a jury, when required by the owner of the property, in such manner as may be prescribed by law, and until the same shall be paid to the owner, or into court for the owner, the property shall not be needlessly disturbed, or the proprietary rights of the owner therein divested; and whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public.<br \/>\nHISTORY: SOURCE: Entire article added, effective August 1, 1876, see L. 1877, p. 30.<\/p>\n<p><strong>As a judicial question, this right has been extensively litigated over the years.\u00a0 A few of the more interesting findings &#8211;<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>SECTION AFFORDS GREATER PROTECTION THAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTION<\/strong>. This section affords an aggrieved property owner a greater measure of protection than does the constitution of the United States. The fifth amendment of the United States Constitution requires compensation only where there has been an actual taking. The Colorado Constitution, however, provides for compensation where private property has been taken or damaged. Mosher v. City of Boulder, 225 F. Supp. 32 (D. Colo. 1964).<\/li>\n<li><strong>PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION<\/strong> of the constitution is to provide a remedy in damages for injury to property, not common to the public, inflicted by the state or one of its political subdivisions; and this section is not limited in application to condemnation proceedings. Srb v. Bd. of County Comm&#8217;rs, 43 Colo. App. 14, 601 P.2d 1082 (1979).<\/li>\n<li><strong>IT MARKS BOUNDARY BEYOND WHICH PEOPLE HAVE FORBIDDEN LAWMAKERS TO PASS<\/strong> and have commanded their courts to hold any such passage illegal. How inviolable that constitutional inhibition is, is demonstrated by the fact that the supreme court once inadvertently permitted its protection to be threatened (North Sterling Irrigation Dist. v. Dickman, 59 Colo. 169, 149 P. 97 (1915)), but at the first opportunity overruled the dangerous precedent and returned to the solid ground of strict construction. Bd. of Comm&#8217;rs v. Adler, 69 Colo. 290, 194 P. 621 (1920); San Luis Valley Irrigation Dist. v. Noffsinger, 85 Colo. 202, 274 P. 827 (1929).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>These findings and many more may be read at the free reference site <a href=\"http:\/\/www.lexisnexis.com\/hottopics\/colorado\/\" target=\"_blank\">Colorado Legal Resources<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The Colorado Constitution was 20 years ahead of the U.S. Supreme Court&#8217;s incorporation of the 5th Am. <em>Takings Clause<\/em> under the 14th Am., which extended this limitation on Federal power to also limit all States&#8217; powers.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>In 2005 the Kelo decision expanded the range of acceptable reasoning a government could use to take private property under the 5th Am.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">An <strong><em>eminent domain<\/em><\/strong> action requires that the government&#8217;s taking of property be for a &#8220;public use&#8221;. A public use is generally one which confers some benefit or advantage to the public. The term does not necessarily imply &#8212; and is not confined to &#8212; actual &#8220;use&#8221; by the public. Moreover, the purported benefit to be derived from the taking of property need not be available to the entire public; it may benefit a smaller sector of members of the public in a particular locality, i.e. a subdivision of the general public. In other words, it is not necessary that the intended users be all members of the public; rather, it is the purpose for the taking that must be for the public, and not for the benefit of any particular individuals.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">The use (purpose) must be a needed one, which cannot be surrendered without obvious general loss or inconvenience. However, the parameters of such needed public use move along a spectrum, and defy absolute definition because of factors such as changing needs of society, increases in population, and developing modes of transportation and communications.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">In Kelo v. City of New Landen (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether that changing parameter was broad enough to include for-profit development of real estate which would ostensibly result in needed economic growth for the community. In a decision that surprised many, the Court agreed.<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/http:\/\/realestate.findlaw.com\/land-use-laws\/eminent-domain-public-use-requirement.html\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/realestate.findlaw.com\/land-use-laws\/eminent-domain-public-use-requirement.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong>Now come the Left to Colorado, <em>nationally funded<\/em> [see <a href=\"http:\/\/coloradopeakpolitics.com\/2014\/02\/26\/wolves-among-us-the-four-things-you-need-to-know-about-local-control-colorado\/\" target=\"_blank\">Wolves Among Us<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/coloradopeakpolitics.com\/2014\/03\/14\/fractivist-laid-bare-leader-of-antifracking-movement-is-also-antigrowth\/\" target=\"_blank\">Fractivist Laid Bare<\/a>], promoting amendments to the Colorado Constitution to radically change the definition and scope of our private property.\u00a0 Radical change has apparently called for a radical strategy.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>A <a href=\"http:\/\/clowardandpiven.com\/\" target=\"_blank\">Cloward and Piven<\/a> strategy &#8211;<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201c[W]ould produce bureaucratic disruption. . .and fiscal disruption in local and state governments\u201d that would \u201cdeepen existing divisions among. . . [everyone]. . .to advance a federal solution. . .that would override local. . .failures, local class and. . .conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c[P]roposed to create a crisis in the current. . .system \u2013 by exploiting the gap between. . .law and practice \u2013 that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed [outcomes]. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing [citizens] of their rights. . ., encouraging them to. . .overload. . .an already overburdened bureaucracy.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption[.]\u00a0\u00a0 &#8220;Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute. . .and the strains on local budgets became more severe.&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Consider some of the amendments proposed &#8211;<\/strong><\/p>\n<h5 style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Summary of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.leg.state.co.us\/LCS\/Initiative%20Referendum\/1314InitRefr.nsf\/acd7e51d3fc2b60b87257a3700571f9f\/f40fa17e3fc9b7eb87257c99004e8989?OpenDocument\" target=\"_blank\">proposed Initiative 103<\/a>, filed by Phillip T. Doe &amp; Barbara Mills-Bria\u00a0(Current as of 3\/13\/14):<\/h5>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 60px;\">Initiative 103 would amend the Colorado Constitution by adding a new section to Article XVI, the provisions of the constitution that govern mining and water rights. This amendment would:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">Establish an \u201cinalienable right\u201d of the people of Colorado to clean air, clean water (including groundwater), and the preservation of the environment and natural resources (called \u201cPublic Trust Resources\u201d), as common property of all people including future generations;<br \/>\nRequire the state, as trustee of these resources, to conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people;<br \/>\nRequire state government and its agents, as trustees, to protect Public Trust Resources from substantial impairment including pollution, applying a \u201cprecautionary principle\u201d that any action or policy with a suspected risk, absent a scientific consensus of harm, places the burden of proving no harm on the proponents;<br \/>\nObligate the state to seek natural resource damages from entities causing substantial impairment to Public Trust Resources, and to use such funds to remediate the harm;<br \/>\nAuthorize all Colorado citizens (as beneficiaries) to sue to preserve Public Trust Resources against substantial impairment and to enforce the State\u2019s obligations as trustee, to obtain legal and equitable remedies, and to recover attorney fees and costs when a court finds the state has not met its duties as trustee;<br \/>\nRequire the state as trustee to use best available science in any process or proceeding that may affect Public Trust Resources, and to refer for criminal prosecution anyone manipulating data or scientific information for private profit; and<br \/>\nApply to all public actions or commercial transactions that would violate these provisions, \u201cregardless of the date of any applicable local, state or federal permits.\u201d<\/p>\n<h5 style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Summary of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.leg.state.co.us\/LCS\/Initiative%20Referendum\/1314InitRefr.nsf\/acd7e51d3fc2b60b87257a3700571f9f\/0045a1bb869cfc3587257c900080861d\/$FILE\/2013-2014%2389.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">proposed Initiative 89<\/a>, filed by\u00a0Caitlin Leahy and Gregory Diamond (Current as of 3\/5\/14)<\/h5>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 60px;\">Initiative 89 would amend the Colorado Constitution by adding a new Article, declaring and providing as follows:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">Declares that Colorado\u2019s environment is \u201cthe common property of all Coloradans\u201d;<br \/>\nDeclares that conservation of Colorado\u2019s environment (including clean air, pure water, natural, and scenic values) is \u201cfundamental\u201d;<br \/>\nDeclares that Colorado\u2019s environment should be \u201cprotected and preserved\u201d for all Coloradans, including future generations;<br \/>\nStates that the people of Colorado, including future generations, have a \u201cright to Colorado\u2019s environment\u201d (including clean air, pure water, natural, and scenic values);<br \/>\nDesignates the state and local governments as trustees of \u201cthis resource\u201d (referring to Colorado\u2019s environment), requiring them to conserve Colorado\u2019s environment (including clean air, pure water, natural, and scenic values) \u201cfor the benefit of all the people\u201d;<br \/>\nApplies these provisions to the state, as well as to every city, town, county, and city and county, notwithstanding the provisions of the constitution that provide for Home Rule cities and towns and for Home Rule counties;<br \/>\nProvides that these provisions are self-executing and severable;<br \/>\nProvides that local governments shall have the power to enact laws, regulations, ordinances, and charter provisions that are \u201cmore restrictive and protective\u201d of the environment than those enacted or adopted by state government; and<br \/>\nProvides that if a locally-enacted law or regulation adopted pursuant to the new Article conflicts with a state-enacted law or regulation, the \u201cmore restrictive and protective law or regulation shall govern.\u201d<\/p>\n<h5 style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Summary of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sos.state.co.us\/pubs\/elections\/Initiatives\/titleBoard\/filings\/2013-2014\/75Final.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">The Right To Local Self-Government<\/a> from the Colorado Community Rights Network.<\/h5>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">As all political power is vested in and derived from the people, and as all government of right originates from the people, the people have an inherent and inalienable right to local self-government, in each county, city, town, and other municipality.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">That right shall include, without limitation:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">The power to enact local laws. . .by establishing the fundamental rights of individuals, their communities, and nature. . .<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 90px;\">. . .[to] define, alter or eliminate the rights, powers, and duties of corporations and other business entities. . .<\/p>\n<p><strong>The first two proposals above invent new public property rights that necessarily imply the abrogation of currently held private property rights.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>The third proposal above invents classes of rights held by communities and nature [who speaks for nature?] and explicitly abrogates rights, powers and duties of corporations and other business entities &#8211; and it does so on the premise of our individual rights!<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>To say the least, these propositions are tough sells in the Land of the Free.\u00a0 Each one contemplates a revolutionary overthrow of property, contractual, and ownership rights in Colorado.\u00a0 Without any obfuscation or subterfuge, these questions demand a sober and detailed analysis.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Enter Cloward and Piven, and consider the Facebook page <a href=\"https:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/events\/1428125767433294?acontext={%22ref%22%3A1}&amp;_rdr\" target=\"_blank\">Yes We Can Ban Fracking<\/a>, subtitled <em>Jared Polis and Dark Money Democrats <\/em>detailed below<em> &#8211;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<div style=\"padding-left: 60px;\">\n<h4>About<\/h4>\n<p>JARED POLIS and his friends at RBI Strategies, which is affiliated with Hilltop Public Solutions &#8211; a Democratic PR and campaign management firm known for running dark money campaigns and funding faux grassroots groups (links below) &#8211; and which recently opened an office in CO, has LAUNCHED A FALSE CITIZENS INITIATIVE CAMPAIGN called COLORADANS FOR LOCAL CONTROL, with the intent to CONFUSE and DIFFUSE public backlash to fracking in Colorado. THIS INITIATIVE DOES NOT OPPOSE FRACKING!<\/p>\n<p>Craig Hughes recently left RBI to open Hilltop&#8217;s Denver office. Hilltop employs former Polis campaign staffers, including Lisa Kaufman, Polis&#8217;s campaign manager of six years, who is an affiliate in the firm&#8217;s newly opened Denver office. Hilltop is running campaigns for candidates who support oil and gas extraction.<\/p>\n<p>Polis and friends have co-opted language used in a ballot initiative know as the COLORADO COMMUNITY RIGHTS AMENDMENT, BALLOT MEASURE 75, which will be on the 2014 ballot and which is supported 100% by ACTUAL COLORADO CITIZENS.<\/p>\n<p>Polis and friends, in attempting to drown out the voices of Colorado citizens, have introduced not one but NINE, yes NINE initiatives, all the same with slightly different language. They are attempting to confuse voters and drown out the public backlash against fracking in Colorado.<\/p>\n<p>Who&#8217;s behind this masquerade to confuse the public and diffuse the public backlash against fracking in Colorado?<\/p>\n<p>Well\u2026aside from Polis and RBI Solutions, the NINE initiatives, including the Orwellian named Coloradans for Local Control, were submitted by Caitlin Leahey of Lafayette, longtime Fundraising and Events Coordinator for, you guessed it, Jared Polis. The other name on the ballot initiatives is Gregory Diamond, longtime Democratic Party political operative whose wife, Faye Diamond, is a partner at RBI Solutions. The tangled webs we weave! Gregory Diamond IS NOT EVEN A RESIDENT OF COLORADO. He owns a home in Colorado, but resides in Orange County, CA, where he is currently running for office.<br \/>\nConfused? Well, that is the objective!<\/p>\n<p>Follow Colorado Frack Attack on FB (Facebook.com\/COFrackAttack) and Twitter (@COFrackAttack) &#8211; use these links so you don&#8217;t wind up on a false site &#8211; as we unravel this tangled web. If you&#8217;re itching to know more right now, here are some links to get you started:<\/p>\n<p>IN THE BEGINNING\u2026PRESS RELEASE FROM RBI STRATEGIES<br \/>\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br \/>\nMarch 3, 2014<br \/>\nContact: Rick Ridder<br \/>\nrick@rbistrategies.com<br \/>\n303-832-2444<\/p>\n<p>Coloradans for Local Control Introduce Ballot Language to Protect Coloradans from Impacts of Fracking<br \/>\n9 Potential Initiatives Explore Different Solutions to Coloradan\u2019s Concerns with balancing Oil and Gas Development with residents\u2019 quality of life and property values.<\/p>\n<p>(Denver, CO) \u2013 Today, several Colorado citizens took a stand for better balancing oil and gas drilling, including fracking with residents\u2019 quality of life and property values. Coloradans for Local Control introduced language for potential ballot initiatives that, if passed, would help citizens ensure that fracking and oil and gas drilling is done in a way that minimizes the negative impact on property values, health, safety and environment.<br \/>\nThese initiatives aim to allow the oil and gas industry to operate safely while protecting homeowners from health risks and losses in property values that result from fracking taking place too close to where we work, live and play.<br \/>\nIntroducing multiple initiatives recognizes that there are several ways to address this issue. Coloradans for Local Control acknowledges the importance of starting a conversation with the citizens of Colorado on the best way to make sure communities and citizens have the right to determine where and how oil and gas drilling and fracking is done \u2013 the same rights that exist for nearly all other industrial usages of land and water.<br \/>\nFrom schoolyards to backyards, these initiatives will give greater protection to Colorado families and neighborhoods.<br \/>\nRick Ridder<br \/>\nRick@rbistrategies.com<\/p>\n<p>ARTICLE: Polis Backing Coloradan&#8217;s for Local Control (don&#8217;t be fooled, it&#8217;s PRO fracking)<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fkdvr.com%2F2014%2F03%2F05%2Fpolis-helping-fund-fracking-ban-initiative-push%2F&amp;h=TAQGiO1QH&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/kdvr.com\/2014\/03\/05\/polis-he&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n<p>FORMER RBI PARTNER OPENS COLORADO OFFICE FOR DARK MONEY FIRM HILLTOP PUBLIC SOLUTIONS<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.campaignsandelections.com%2Fcampaign-insider%2F367777%2Fhilltop-public-solutions-opens-colorado-office.thtml&amp;h=NAQHFx091&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/www.campaignsandelections.com\/&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n<p>RBI AND HILLTOP COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.denverpost.com%2Fthespot%2F2013%2F04%2F17%2Fcraig-hughes-democratic-political-operative-to-head-local-chapter-of-national-firm%2F94242%2F&amp;h=NAQHFx091&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/blogs.denverpost.com\/thespot&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n<p>ARTICLES ABOUT HILLTOP PUBLIC SOLUTION&#8217;S DARK MONEY OPERATIONS<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.propublica.org%2Farticle%2Fin-montana-dark-money-helped-democrats-hold-a-key-senate-seat&amp;h=DAQFko5en&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/www.propublica.org\/article\/i&#8230;<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.publicintegrity.org%2F2012%2F11%2F30%2F11878%2Fdrug-lobby-donation-went-pro-democratic-nonprofit&amp;h=EAQH_c9N2&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/www.publicintegrity.org\/2012&#8230;<\/a><br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/m2.facebook.com\/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.northernbroadcasting.com%2FTalk%2FFlintReportHeadlines%2Ftabid%2F519%2FID%2F8951%2FMontana-tied-Dark-Money-Firm-Expands-to-Colorado.aspx&amp;h=_AQESLznr&amp;s=1\" target=\"_blank\">http:\/\/www.northernbroadcasting.com\/&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><strong>The above Facebook event boldly misrepresents the initiatives as being for fracking, when in fact they&#8217;re all constructs designed to shut down fracking.\u00a0 Every link and reference points to a pro-Leftist issue, organization, individual, or opinion.\u00a0 Moreover, while perpetrating a grand confusion, the author blames others for sowing that confusion.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>This intelligent propaganda overwhelms logical reasoning.\u00a0 It seeds the internet with the false assumption that the majority of Colorado is against fracking. It motivates activists to militate against fracking.\u00a0 It feeds them a set of can&#8217;t lose &#8220;alternative&#8221; propositions that all fundamentally accomplish their objectives, and it motivates activists to go out and argue about them.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>This smells of a Cloward and Piven strategy to produce an outcome by confusing and overwhelming the electoral system in Colorado.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>But it would be odd to expect the people who intend to dispossess Colorodans of much of their property to play fair. That&#8217;s just not something that truly fair minded people do, despite how they represent their motives.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>It&#8217;s what con men do.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Since 1876, the Colorado Constitution protected Colorado citizens from uncompensated property takings by the State of Colorado. CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, ARTICLE II BILL OF RIGHTS &#8211; Colo. Const. Art. II, Section 15 (2013) Section 15. TAKING PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE &#8211; COMPENSATION, HOW ASCERTAINED Private property shall not be taken or damaged, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[42,85],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-4531","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-constitution","7":"category-leftism","8":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4531","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4531"}],"version-history":[{"count":26,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4531\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4559,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4531\/revisions\/4559"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4531"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4531"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elbertcounty.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4531"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}