In housing policy advocating for this sort of thing is almost always used as an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Asking people to upzone at no cost to the public system (even though it failed this time) seems easier to me than asking to upzone and then asking voters to pay more tax to provide a $150K-300K+ subsidy to each of those subsidized units.
-
-
arguments for fully social or affordable housing, without a plausible path to achieving it at scale, can be bad ideas, if they help justify opposition to needed and achievable housing - as is now common. Here's Jim Beall, chair of committee that killed SB827, doing exactly that.pic.twitter.com/c6IJrXJ78C
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.