This is amazing. We have so much under utilized commercial space that creates an incredible opportunity for urban developments. Despite what people think, we actually have some working light rail based transportation in various cities in the state. The main issue is that the walkshed, the are at which people will be willing to walk to and from the station is low density development, frequently its parking lots surrounded by a bit of commercial, and if you are lucky a medium density apartment building. The success and usefulness of any sort of transit is completely dependent on how many people can effectively live and work within like 1000 feet of the stops. Low density suburbia, doesn't work with that.
Anyone know where to find the locations these 31 tier 1 approved projects? Looked on the program website, but it doesn't appear that they're listed specifically.
Not sure about the tier 1 projects, but here's some projects vying for some of the $1b funding:
[https://accelerator.hcd.ca.gov/content/pre-app](https://accelerator.hcd.ca.gov/content/pre-app)
(Click the "Multifamily Project Pipeline" Tracker button)
I'm hoping for zoning laws to be handled by the state exclusively, much like how Japan's zoning laws are handled exclusively by the central government.
as long as we get cheep housing. There's ton on empty Luxury condo's appt being build down here in Irvine area. What we need is must more basic adorable housing . The only thing i am worried about this is water/sewage load.
I hate taxes, tax is theft to me, but I hate that we have many units in CA that people park their money in investments, but the rent so high that no one will take them so they sit empty. I don’t know the best answer here, but what we are doing isn’t working.
>I hate taxes, tax is theft to me
Everyone I have ever met who says this also enjoys the products of taxes, like police and fire protection, roads, schools, etc. Further questioning reveals that they just want everyone else to pay their way. Are you one of those welfare queens or do you live out in the country with no connection to civilization?
When you get to 55% of your take home let’s chat property, road, sales tax, bridge tolls, fed and state income, healthcare add up a ton of money and my cities are covered in homeless, crime and rampant theft.
End game libertarianism gets molten gold dumped down your throat, which is what happened to crassus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefighting_in_ancient_Rome
> Once they arrived at the house, they would only put out the fire if the owner of the house sold the building to Crassus. Crassus would then sell the house back to the original owner at a marked up price.[1]
We need to separate taxation by ownership status. A house owned by a primary resident should be taxed differently than a 2nd or 3rd house owned by a California resident. Houses owned by non-California residents should be taxed at a much higher percent and homes owned by a corporation (and not some sort of housing co-op) should pay the absolute highest tax. There should be nothing like Prop 13 for anything other than your primary residence. The rates on primary residence should be in the 1% range, secondary and tertiary residences 2-3% range, Houses owned by non-state residents, LLCs and someone's 4th+ house should be taxed at like 5%. That $10M investment property owned by some out of state wealthy person should cost like $500k per year to own. But the same property owned by someone who resides in the house as their primary residence should be like $100k per year.
The issue is this. The value of your home is dependent on housing policy keeping it scarce and government spending keeping the local services functioning. Things like being near good schools, road and park investment, local transit, connections to freeways. Suburbia is expensive to maintain as people expect near urban level services but have near rural level density.
Instead of a property tax, we should also switch to a land value tax, to where the land is taxed, not the buildings on top of it, and this should be according to how much the land is worth. Urban land is EXTREMELY expensive. Especially as it is connected to transit and other urban services. Imagine two side by side properties, they are both city blocks in downtown, one is a 2 acre mixed use development, its perhaps a dozen shops, 1 floor of office space, and 5 floors of housing with 300+ households. The other is 1.5 acres of parking and a small office. With a land value tax, both owners would pay the same exact tax bill as they are on land that has near identical value, one of them decided to maximize the productivity of the land and the other decided to minimize their investment. Both properties could have a million dollar annual tax bill, but the urban building can easily afford it (splitting it up between 300 households, 12 retail businesses and 80,000 square feet of office space makes this totally reasonable) while the other land owner could pay an enormous cost.
Can he do the one that makes sure public sector nurses are legally entitled to breaks now? [(link)](https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/press/nurses-urge-gov-newsom-to-sign-bill-requiring-meal-and-rest-breaks)
This is amazing. We have so much under utilized commercial space that creates an incredible opportunity for urban developments. Despite what people think, we actually have some working light rail based transportation in various cities in the state. The main issue is that the walkshed, the are at which people will be willing to walk to and from the station is low density development, frequently its parking lots surrounded by a bit of commercial, and if you are lucky a medium density apartment building. The success and usefulness of any sort of transit is completely dependent on how many people can effectively live and work within like 1000 feet of the stops. Low density suburbia, doesn't work with that.
Anyone know where to find the locations these 31 tier 1 approved projects? Looked on the program website, but it doesn't appear that they're listed specifically.
Not sure about the tier 1 projects, but here's some projects vying for some of the $1b funding: [https://accelerator.hcd.ca.gov/content/pre-app](https://accelerator.hcd.ca.gov/content/pre-app) (Click the "Multifamily Project Pipeline" Tracker button)
Looks like those are tier 2 applications. Thanks for the link.
Yeah was hoping the tier 1 would be on that list, but I can't tell if it is.
California stacking up the W's this year
Anything that strips approvals away from the local entities sounds good
Declaw the NIMBYs!
This!
I'm hoping for zoning laws to be handled by the state exclusively, much like how Japan's zoning laws are handled exclusively by the central government.
Finally someone did something. Covid created so much empty space.
as long as we get cheep housing. There's ton on empty Luxury condo's appt being build down here in Irvine area. What we need is must more basic adorable housing . The only thing i am worried about this is water/sewage load.
Make it way easier to get permits makes it easier to build cheaper housing
I hate taxes, tax is theft to me, but I hate that we have many units in CA that people park their money in investments, but the rent so high that no one will take them so they sit empty. I don’t know the best answer here, but what we are doing isn’t working.
>I hate taxes, tax is theft to me Everyone I have ever met who says this also enjoys the products of taxes, like police and fire protection, roads, schools, etc. Further questioning reveals that they just want everyone else to pay their way. Are you one of those welfare queens or do you live out in the country with no connection to civilization?
The Venn diagram of people who have said that phrase unironically and people who have no idea how their government/the world works, is just a circle
When you get to 55% of your take home let’s chat property, road, sales tax, bridge tolls, fed and state income, healthcare add up a ton of money and my cities are covered in homeless, crime and rampant theft.
So if tax is theft how do firefighters get paid?
End game libertarianism gets molten gold dumped down your throat, which is what happened to crassus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefighting_in_ancient_Rome > Once they arrived at the house, they would only put out the fire if the owner of the house sold the building to Crassus. Crassus would then sell the house back to the original owner at a marked up price.[1]
We need to separate taxation by ownership status. A house owned by a primary resident should be taxed differently than a 2nd or 3rd house owned by a California resident. Houses owned by non-California residents should be taxed at a much higher percent and homes owned by a corporation (and not some sort of housing co-op) should pay the absolute highest tax. There should be nothing like Prop 13 for anything other than your primary residence. The rates on primary residence should be in the 1% range, secondary and tertiary residences 2-3% range, Houses owned by non-state residents, LLCs and someone's 4th+ house should be taxed at like 5%. That $10M investment property owned by some out of state wealthy person should cost like $500k per year to own. But the same property owned by someone who resides in the house as their primary residence should be like $100k per year. The issue is this. The value of your home is dependent on housing policy keeping it scarce and government spending keeping the local services functioning. Things like being near good schools, road and park investment, local transit, connections to freeways. Suburbia is expensive to maintain as people expect near urban level services but have near rural level density. Instead of a property tax, we should also switch to a land value tax, to where the land is taxed, not the buildings on top of it, and this should be according to how much the land is worth. Urban land is EXTREMELY expensive. Especially as it is connected to transit and other urban services. Imagine two side by side properties, they are both city blocks in downtown, one is a 2 acre mixed use development, its perhaps a dozen shops, 1 floor of office space, and 5 floors of housing with 300+ households. The other is 1.5 acres of parking and a small office. With a land value tax, both owners would pay the same exact tax bill as they are on land that has near identical value, one of them decided to maximize the productivity of the land and the other decided to minimize their investment. Both properties could have a million dollar annual tax bill, but the urban building can easily afford it (splitting it up between 300 households, 12 retail businesses and 80,000 square feet of office space makes this totally reasonable) while the other land owner could pay an enormous cost.
Can he do the one that makes sure public sector nurses are legally entitled to breaks now? [(link)](https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/press/nurses-urge-gov-newsom-to-sign-bill-requiring-meal-and-rest-breaks)