Quote:
Originally Posted by City Wide
My two cents--------------City Council is what it is and declaring that it needs to radically change, however true that might be, doesn't go very far in dealing with the day to day reality of living in the City. I completely agree as long as people like Blackwell (or fill in the blank) keep getting elected there seems to be little hope. A well funded campaign to institute term limits might at least bring more new blood more often into the council.
Most organizations benefit from a return to basics every so often, and City gov't. is no different. This is why I believe most/all laws and tax increases should have a 5 or 10 year sunset provision. If the law in question is working it shouldn't have any trouble getting a 2/3's vote for being kept in place for another term. Also changing the City's Charter should include methods that allow the citizens much easier means to bring change before the voters. In the mean while, I'd like to see this or any mayor state in 10 minutes or less what the basic needs or the City are and how they will be addressed.
Gentrification has many different faces----35 years ago I bought 4 row houses, 3 which were empty, in Powelton Village for around $20K. I more or less lost money fixing/rebuilding 2 of them and made out pretty good selling the other 2 as shells. I'd call that 'hands on' gentrification, and I'm sure some of that goes on today. But mostly what I think goes on today is happening by small and mid sized developers who IMO just don't care about the neighborhoods and the people already living there as much as they care about the $$$ rewards. If you are fixing up or building new and plan to live there you are going to have a different attitude then if all you do is buy what somebody else has built. There's also a type of what's called gentrification where good solid neighborhoods get even more desirable. I live in UC on what was near the outer edges, now a neighbors house sold for almost $1M last year. Not only do I belly arch about the type of people moving in who don't know and don't care about living in a 120 year old house, but because of taxes I don't know how much longer I can afford to live here. Sure, I'll make out big time when I sell, but that doesn't help pay the $6+K tax bill due early next year, when about 10 years ago the bill was $1100. The difference does make a difference to me.
There should be some better ways to allow parts of the City to improve and let the market determine value and at the same time offer means for long time residents to continue to be long time residents. Change is not good or bad in itself, all it is is change.
|
What makes a neighbor care or don't care about living in a 120 year old house? It is ownership vs. rental or knowing the history of the old house so when repairs are done or restoration work is done, it is done right and to standards, say restoration work (i.e., in keeping with the historical character of the home). I think having financial resources, if you are an owner, will afford you the opportunity, but if not, then I think it is probably equal to someone renting. Renters do not need to make investment in the property that they are living in.
Second, in regards to change, I don't think it is just change. I do think it affects people. When property values and taxes goes up as a consequence of gentrification, then lower and middle class folks who lived there before the gentrification may get prices out or have to adjust their budgets to accommodate the increases in taxes. Something akin to your point above.
Prev
Linear Mode
