Nextdoor's policies are about the same quality as their text editor. Using their editor, you can't add inline graphics or links, or make italics or bold text. Pretty second rate, IMHO. There are even free, and/or open source text editors that have many of the above features...but no, we must type plain text, no inline links or graphics.
Similarly, any public policy discussions one might have, even civil ones, are discouraged in favor of commercial and crime announcements, or missing pets. We're not citizens, we're consumers. (Who profits from distracted citizens? See https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746)
As for Supervisor Frost, (and Supervisor Peters) When will we hear from them why they voted (on LAFCO) to expand the development area around Elk Grove by 1000+ acres?
Developing ag land is enormously profitable for land speculators, who can buy or option the land cheaply, then re-sell it to builders for as much as 50 - 100 times their cost when the speculators get it re-zoned.
Yet Elk Grove has thousands of undeveloped acres that are already approved for development, and the region itself has 20 years worth of unbuilt infill.
Ms. Frost paints herself as a "Fiscally Responsible[tm]" representative, but it's much more expensive for local governments to develop greenfield (outlying ag land) rather than infill. The water and sewer runs are longer, as are the emergency vehicle trips, etc. (See https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2018/08/24/suburban-sprawl-is-expensive-when-you-actually-have-to-pay-for-it/, or https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/03/05/sprawl-costs-the-public-more-than-twice-as-much-as-compact-development/)
What happened to Ms. Frost's "Fiscal Responsibility[tm]" and fretting about low County budget reserves? Could serving the land speculators rather than the public play a role? Gosh! I wonder!
If you think this is no big deal, then compare our current circumstances with the German system. When a German developer wants to build on outlying land, s/he must sell the land at the ag land price to the local government, then buy it back at the upzoned prize. The public, not the land speculators, gets the profit. Germany is certainly not perfect, but it has the equivalent of Medicare-for-all, and free tuition for its universities, even for foreigners. The arts budget for the City of Berlin exceeds the National Endowment for the Arts for the U.S. of A. Our public services are pathetic, in comparison.
I've asked Ms. Frost whether she'd consider at least taxing that "unearned increment" (the enormous 5,000% - 10,000% profit the speculators get...tax free, if they 1031 exchange!)...and her response has been: [crickets].
Similarly, she's supporting a proposed revision to Prop 13 that would actually diminish tax collections, but won't comment about the proposal to close the commercial property loophole that costs the state an estimated $11 billion a year.
Yep, she's a puzzle, all right.
Similarly, any public policy discussions one might have, even civil ones, are discouraged in favor of commercial and crime announcements, or missing pets. We're not citizens, we're consumers. (Who profits from distracted citizens? See https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746)
As for Supervisor Frost, (and Supervisor Peters) When will we hear from them why they voted (on LAFCO) to expand the development area around Elk Grove by 1000+ acres?
Developing ag land is enormously profitable for land speculators, who can buy or option the land cheaply, then re-sell it to builders for as much as 50 - 100 times their cost when the speculators get it re-zoned.
Yet Elk Grove has thousands of undeveloped acres that are already approved for development, and the region itself has 20 years worth of unbuilt infill.
Ms. Frost paints herself as a "Fiscally Responsible[tm]" representative, but it's much more expensive for local governments to develop greenfield (outlying ag land) rather than infill. The water and sewer runs are longer, as are the emergency vehicle trips, etc. (See https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2018/08/24/suburban-sprawl-is-expensive-when-you-actually-have-to-pay-for-it/, or https://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/03/05/sprawl-costs-the-public-more-than-twice-as-much-as-compact-development/)
What happened to Ms. Frost's "Fiscal Responsibility[tm]" and fretting about low County budget reserves? Could serving the land speculators rather than the public play a role? Gosh! I wonder!
If you think this is no big deal, then compare our current circumstances with the German system. When a German developer wants to build on outlying land, s/he must sell the land at the ag land price to the local government, then buy it back at the upzoned prize. The public, not the land speculators, gets the profit. Germany is certainly not perfect, but it has the equivalent of Medicare-for-all, and free tuition for its universities, even for foreigners. The arts budget for the City of Berlin exceeds the National Endowment for the Arts for the U.S. of A. Our public services are pathetic, in comparison.
I've asked Ms. Frost whether she'd consider at least taxing that "unearned increment" (the enormous 5,000% - 10,000% profit the speculators get...tax free, if they 1031 exchange!)...and her response has been: [crickets].
Similarly, she's supporting a proposed revision to Prop 13 that would actually diminish tax collections, but won't comment about the proposal to close the commercial property loophole that costs the state an estimated $11 billion a year.
Yep, she's a puzzle, all right.
No comments:
Post a Comment
One of the objects if this blog is to elevate civil discourse. Please do your part by presenting arguments rather than attacks or unfounded accusations.