By: Kenneth

Kenneth — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 22:47:54 +0000

In San Francisco, the policy is known alternatively as “Livable Streets”, “Sustainable Streets”, and “Vision Zero”; and it is being advanced and implemented by program personnel against the better judgment of day to day department workers who realize the sensitive nature of the transportation network.
The matter of efficiency and inefficiency of property refers, I am sure, to the capacity of property to maximize tax revenue. The highest tax revenue referring back to maximum efficiency, or monetary utility.
The “Sustainable Streets” program in San Francisco is meant to create a sense of seclusion and exclusivity in protected residential areas, in order to promote higher sales prices, and not greater housing affordability, which is what the local pols tout. There are multiple, and parallel housing markets in San Francisco, with the City leaders, for example, side lining condominium conversion among properties held under rent control, in order to tighten the market supply of such housing units, which underscores the profit of high end and luxury developers of free market units. In a sense it is a matter of unfair competitive practices, legislated into the process.

By: Elisabeth Cohen

Elisabeth Cohen — Sat, 31 Aug 2013 03:28:02 +0000

Woe to those of us trapped in taxifornia.
This my friends is happening right under our noses.
The liberal politicos are ramrodding this and doing their damnedest to make sure the public does not find out.
They are succeeding.
They are succeeding in part,because they did not publicize far and wide.
They did not translate it nor did they present it to various ethnic communities. It was not in mainstream media.
Ultimately, most of the electorate does not care until the ramifications are in place and it affects them directly.
Yet they still vote for demoncrats.

Comments on: SB 1 would brand ‘inefficiency’ as blight

By: Kenneth

By: Elisabeth Cohen