Monday, November 24, 2014
Sunday, November 23, 2014
Marinwood project may wallop Dixie schools, Marin economic report concludes
Marinwood project may wallop Dixie schools, Marin economic report concludes
Project puts stress on Dixie schools, but helps merchants
 |
| "Marinwood Village will stop global warming, get people on bicycles, provide opportunities for everyone and won't cost us a cent, folks" |
Plans for an 82-unit affordable housing complex at Marinwood Plaza pose fiscal hardships for the Dixie School District but could be a boon for merchants, although so many variables are involved that impacts of the project remain uncertain, a new study indicates.
The study by Marin Economic Forum chief Robert Eyler outlines a variety of potential fiscal and social factors associated with the controversial plan for 72 affordable and 10 market-rate dwellings.
The report, commissioned by the county to provide a fresh perspective on the project, will be discussed when Eyler presents it to the county board at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday at the Civic Center.
The report says that the project in which most units would not pay property taxes could wallop the Dixie schools budget but concludes that in light of varying development, realty market, residential occupancy, school fiscal and related situations, much remains unclear.
"The more kids that come to Dixie as a result of the new housing units, the more pressure Dixie will face in terms of resources per student," Eyler noted. He added the district's revenue loss could range from 2.1 percent, if 45 new students are involved, to a 4.69 percent loss if 100 new students are enrolled as a result of the affordable project — as school officials expect.
"Dixie may also face additional, unfunded costs because the new students will be eligible for additional benefits from the school due to low-to-moderate income status.""Dixie may face higher enrollments and lower levels of financial resources per student at the same time costs are rising without additional revenues," according to the report. "The bottom line is that new students may arrive without enough new revenues to cover new costs."
ECONOMIC BOOM
Benefits include an economic boom of sorts because "new households provide a spending infusion where they are located," as well as an immediate burst of construction jobs. Eyler estimated "annual spending introduced into Marinwood" at roughly $3.5 million, with local merchants among those benefiting.
"The academic literature is relatively split on the effects of below market rate housing on local school, housing markets and other factors," according to the study, but "there is no literature basis to suggest" affordable units will mean lower area housing prices, crime or other social ills. "As for increasing criminal activity, the popular consensus seems to be that reducing the concentration of below market rate housing — in a sense placing the units in places where few currently exist — reduces incentives to engage in criminal activity," the report said. And as for health concerns, "most research suggests a positive relationship between moving to more affluent, stable neighborhoods from more impoverished neighborhoods."
"The more the design can match the local area's character, the better in terms of reducing detriments to local housing markets," it added. "In short, the effects of these 82 units are unknown and will depend on how much the units act as substitutes for Marinwood's current housing stock and how much they are perceived as a completely different market," the report said. "If new units are viewed as similar to existing homes and no increase in demand occurs, there would be pressure on Marinwood's overall housing prices to fall. However, if the units are 100 percent occupied and off the market relatively quickly, there is little reason to assume downward value pressure."
REALTY VALUES
Eyler cited studies about how affordable housing impacts realty values, finding one in Northern California that "suggests that housing prices went up" and another indicating that "single family housing prices are not affected significantly in either direction" but fall faster in value when the housing market swoons. Yet another study yielded slightly different results. "In general, the literature is small and mixed on how below market rate housing units affect their local markets," according to Eyler's report.
"No study or data exists to make a precise estimate of the number of students Dixie schools will receive from the new units, or the type of households that will be formed," according to Eyler's report. "More students attending Dixie schools without (property tax) revenue coming from new households may keep Dixie state-funded, and at a lower level of resources than otherwise."
Dixie Schools Superintendent Thomas J. Lohwasser said school officials just received Eyler's report and have not analyzed it, but noted that in addition to other variables, district funding is in flux amid state rules "that are not as clear as they used to be." Dixie for the first time this year became a state-funded district — rather than a basic aid district buoyed by robust tax revenues.
"It's a very complicated time," Lohwasser said, adding he did not know what fiscal impact a Marinwood development would have on schools.
One thing for certain, the schools chief added: "If the students are there, we will serve them."
MARINWOOD AT A GLANCE
A new report by the Marin Economic Forum indicates that in many ways, Marinwood is a demographic microcosm of Marin.
"Marinwood is, at the median, more affluent than Marin County overall," and "less ethnically diverse," as well as a bit older, even though its household size is larger, as is the percentage of households with children. Those 65 and older make up 21 percent of Marinwood's population. Countywide, the ratio is 17 percent.
Marinwood has:
• An estimated 5,870 residents in 2012, down from 6,357 in 2000.
• 2,351 households in 2012, including 583 with grade school children, down from 903 households with school children in 2000.
• A median household income of $130,000; 31 percent greater than Marin's average median income.
• A 1.7 percent vacancy in the stock of housing, well below the county's 7.1 per vacancy rate in 2011.
• Housing stock that includes 3.3 percent apartments, as compared to 27 percent in the county overall.
• 84 percent owner-occupied housing, as compared to 63 percent in Marin overall.
82-unit Marinwood Plaza housing project in limbo
 |
| Brad Wilblan,, Bridge Housing Vice President pitches the Marinwood Plaza development to skeptical neighbors in 2012 |
82-unit Marinwood Plaza housing project in limbo
Supervisor's ouster, lack of information put proposal on hold
Controversial plans for an affordable housing project in Marinwood are at a standstill at the Civic Center.
The 82-unit development proposal by the nonprofit Bridge Housing, a project championed by Supervisor Susan Adams, remains in limbo after her ouster in June. San Rafael City Councilman Damon Connolly will take over the county post in January after a landslide election victory attributed to a campaign in which he argued the Bridge proposal was too big.
Connolly this week reaffirmed an intent to hit a "reset button" on the project, noting he has questioned the size and scale of the proposal, its consistency with community planning efforts, environmental impacts and impacts on school and agency finances.
Connolly, who has not yet read a new report by the Marin Economic Forum on potential impacts of the project, said in an email that "the best answers to guide this development come from the community," and promised to provide "a collaborative vision and leadership style that will ease the tensions between parties instead of exacerbating them."
County planning analysts said they need more information before processing the development application filed by Bridge.
"We are waiting for Bridge to provide additional information and clarify aspects of the project at this time," said Thomas Lai, assistant community development director. Lai indicated county planners have been waiting for answers since August
Until we get that information, we cannot move forward with further work including preparation of the environmental impact report for this application," he said.
Connolly said he has heard "conflicting reports" about the status of the Bridge proposal. "At one point a meeting had been scheduled between me and Bridge to discuss the status of the project and issues that were raised in my campaign, but that meeting was canceled by Bridge," he said.
Lynn Hikida, communications director at Bridge Housing, said "key elements" of the development plan remain intact but indicated the realty deal has changed. Instead of just the 3.5 acres slated for residential development, Bridge Housing wants to buy 5 acres, including the commercial area now offered for sale.
"When the Marinwood Plaza property owner decided to sell additional parcels (Marinwood Market and cell tower) along with the residential development parcels, Bridge responded with an offer," Hikida disclosed, saying all the parcels were put on this market this fall. "We are currently awaiting the seller's response," she said.
Although some observers, including county Planning Commission chairman Don Dickenson, think the project may require more market-rate dwellings, or at least a higher proportion of them to make ends meet, Hikida indicated the project has not changed.
"Our plan's key elements, which are in alignment with the Marinwood guiding principles, have not changed," Hikida said.
EDITOR'S NOTE: It should be noted that the Marinwood guiding principles WERE NOT followed and are expressly against the initial goal of 80% market rate and 20% affordable units with at least 30,000 square feet commercial. The housing lobby and local politicians are intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Over 900 people in our community signed a petition opposing this development.
Also, the toxic waste contamination is far worse than imagined just a year ago. It spreads underneath the 101 freeway and threatens the dairy cattle on Silveira Ranch. Benzene, a class one carcinogen is found at FOUR TIMES the legally allowable levels. A high power microwave farm is literally yards away from the apartments and a childrens play area. A cancer cluster is found next door in Casa Marinwood. It is positively IMMORAL to allow ANY residential development on this site. Housing activists should focus on property that is safe for families and does not burden a small community with excessive tax burden for schools, safety and infrastructure demands.
Saturday, November 22, 2014
The Hunger Games: Catching Paranoia
The Hunger Games: Catching Paranoia (Featuring Agenda 21) (VIDEO)
Alex Jones thinks that Agenda 21 will lead to a real-life version of The Hunger Games. The resulting conspiracy theory mash-up is full of nutty paranoia.
Photo: www.rightwingwatch.org
Photo: www.rightwingwatch.org
If you are like millions of other movie-goers, you saw the second installment of The Hunger Gamesthis past holiday weekend. Catching Fire has made almost $300 million since its release on November 21st. Many viewers on both ends of the political spectrum see their own beliefs reflected back at them in the tale of a dystopic future. Income inequality, sadistic games and government control feature in the plot, giving liberals and Tea Partiers both fodder for their arguments.
Alex Jones goes one better with a Hunger Games and Agenda 21 mash-up.
Our favorite right-wing conspiracy nut and frothing-at-the-mouth ranter, Alex Jones, has combined his interpretation of the Hunger Games with one of his favorite conspiracies. Agenda 21 is a UN paper that deals with sustainability. It covers several topics including poverty, land use, health and the environment. It is nothing more than a blueprint for sustainable development, non-binding and non-threatening. Unless you are Alex Jones (or Glenn Beck).
According to Jones, Agenda 21 is going to result in “the end of humanity and… freedom.” Of course, in Jones’ world, President Obama is a dictator. In Jones’ world there are a lot of fantasy scenarios. In fact, as we speak….
“… all over the country the military is rolling out, preparing for war, not with Al Qaeda but with the Tea Party, with gun owners, with veterans, with Christians.”
Jones displays a frightening level of paranoia.
Seriously? Don’t you think that if, indeed, the military were “rolling out” here in America we would notice? I mean, it’s rather hard to hide a platoon or a phalanx of tanks or whatever a “rolling out” military consists of to Jones. And, naturally, the targets would be people like him. His insistence that the UN has “New World Order” troops and that they are analogous to the Hunger Games‘ Peacekeepers reveals a freakish level of paranoia.
This is all coming true, this is all happening, this is actually the Agenda 21 exact plan,”Jones said. “This woman [Suzanne Collins] who wrote it [the Hunger Games] is either a total patriot and aware of what’s going on and super smart, or she’s a total operative. We’ve tried to contact her many times, obviously.”
Because she couldn’t just be a writer with a good grasp of sociology and history along with a great imagination. Jones is desperate to find out whether Collins is on “his side.” He’s worried that we liberals will “steal” The Hunger Games from conservatives and if the author is not on Jones’ side, she will support that “theft.” His pretzel logic is truly breathtaking:
“They have created the crisis, this is socialism we’re seeing with fascism on top, now their answer will be more of this. They’re saying they hope to cause a leftist revolution with this film and others, so that’s why it looks like it’s anti-establishment because the establishment is so sophisticated that they have to steal our energy.”
Truly dizzying “logic.” This is a man who can’t understand what either socialism or fascism really is. He has created a bogeyman of staggering proportions, one that is so clever that it has twisted the establishment to look anti-establishment just to steal the thunder of the
crazies conservatives. Those tricky liberals!
A view from the other end of the political spectrum.
Jones and his fellow conservatives have glommed on to the totalitarian aspect of The Hunger Games, and it certainly is a dismal thing to contemplate. But the man who plays President Snow has his own ideas about the politics of the films. In an interview with Screen Rant, Donald Sutherland expressed his hopes about what could happen:
“Hopefully they will see this film and the next film and the next film and then maybe organize,” Sutherland said. “Stand up. They might create a third party. They might change the electoral process, they might be able to take over the government, change the tax system.”
Sutherland, a lifelong lefty, was very active in protests in the 1960s. He was against the Vietnam War and took the part of Hawkeye in the film M*A*S*H (1969) because he felt that movie made a statement. Though it was set during the Korean War, it was an indictment of the war that was going on at the time. Sutherland hopes that the Hunger Games films could “be another Battle of Algiers.” That film was an inspiration to many insurgent groups.
Alex Jones is freaked out about the UN’s Agenda 21. He worries that “New World Order” troops are going to come for him because he own guns and is Christian. Perhaps what he should worry about is the poor coming after him because he’s rich. And that he got that way by scaring his audiences. That he uses the Hunger Games film series that wants to be cautionary on all levels to suit his own agenda is nothing less than what you’d expect from him. Can he just go crawl into a bunker somewhere and spare the rest of us his paranoid rants? I’m sure Katniss would prefer that.
Here’s the rant. Lay in supplies — it’s a long one:
These Baby Boomer, "New Urbanist" Architects Hate the Marin Suburban Lifestyle (aka "sprawl")
These self styled elitist advocates of "New Urbanism" hate the typical Marin Suburban lifestyle. If you live in Novato, Marinwood, Terra Linda, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Strawberry, Tam or Sausalito, within 1/2 mile of the 101, your neighborhood could be targeted for redevelopment into a "sustainable community" of condominiums, public housing, bike paths and trolley cars.
The first speaker is noted "New Urbanist" Peter Calthorpe of UC Berkeley and www.calthorpe.com. He lives in an exclusive estate in Berkeley Hills far removed from the urban environment he says is better for humanity. Wouldn't he prefer living close to the Ashby Bart Station? He also was a consultant on the first proposal for Marinwood City at Silvera Ranch for 6000 homes in the 1990s. Susan Adams won her Supervisor seat campaigning against this development with the slogan "Cows not Condos" but signs praises for Plan Bay Area,
Friday, November 21, 2014
Citizen Marin Forum, "Future of Marin" November 13, 2014
Citizen Marin Forum, "Future of Marin" November 13, 2014 featuring Kevin Haroff, Royce Maclemore, Richard Hall, Susan Kirsch and moderated by Dick Spotswood..
Four notable citizen leaders in Marin discuss the problems with Plan Bay Area and the urbanization of Marin.
Here are our show times for the program "Citizen Marin Forum" on Marin TV's Community Channel:
+ Sun 11/23/14 03:00 PM Channel 26
+ Wed 11/26/14 05:00 PM Channel 26
+ Wed 12/03/14 06:00 PM Channel 26
+ Sun 12/07/14 11:00 AM Channel 26
Thursday, November 20, 2014
PLAN BAY AREA POLICY MAPS outline upzoning, new fees, and incentives for developers in Marinwood-Lucas Valley
Click on MTC Plan Bay Area Policy Maps
and please study the shocking changes planned for the Bay Area.
discussed at the MTC Board Meeting on July 13, 2012
The MTC published these policy maps to help planners visualize the "opportunities within the grand vision" of the One Bay Area Plan. They call for massive urbanization throughout the Bay Area through a combination of upzoning, transportation funds, urban growth boundary, development fess (or penalties) and grants.
You'll find that you may have to pay a fine of up to $50,000 (above current development fees) to discourage residential development in outlying areas. Non-residential development may have to pay a fee of up to $20.00 per square foot. Other development in the "approved areas" (such as the Marinwood Priority Development Area) may receive grants for building. The Marinwood PDA is a "transit neighborhood" and will be upzoned to 50 units per acre vs. 4 single family houses per acre on most streets now. We will add from 1500 to 4000 housing units to the current area East of Las Gallinas.
Make no mistake, the One Bay Area Plan is nothing short of a radical scheme to reshape the bay area communities, economy, transportation, and government. This overambitious central plan will create an effective "city state" and strip away property rights, local democracy and economic opportunity for millions.
Supervisor Susan Adams needs to address the community with the Truth. She has served on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for over 9 1/2 years including two years as Vice President.
Supervisor Susan Adams spent 9 1/2 years on ABAG
and served as the Vice President for 2 years.
Enough, Ms. Adams! Please tell us of the full Plan Bay Area plans for Marinwood-Lucas Valley!
Marin Supervisor Steve Kinsey is the President of MTC
"No Way for Citizen Votes on Plan Bay Area" The Day Democracy Died.
A special session of ABAG decides against holding a full vote for Plan Bay Area. Novato's Mayor Pat Ecklund Objects. Scott Haggerty, Alameda County Supervisor, complains the plan screws the rural and suburban communities.
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Sprawl, Schmall... Give Me More Development
 |
| Brooks Pattern, Oakland County , MI County Executive |
If you think four-letter words are dirty and nasty, how about that six-letter word: sprawl.
To the doom and gloom crowd, "sprawl" ranks right up there with the plague, leprosy, and the French.
Well, let me state it unequivocally: I love sprawl. I need it. I promote it. Oakland County can't get enough of it. Are you getting the picture?
Sprawl is not evil. In fact, it is good. It is the inevitable result of a free people exercising their cherished, constitutionally protected rights as individuals to pursue their dreams when choosing where to live, where to work, where to educate, and where to recreate.
Let's stop the hysteria and honestly ask ourselves what is sprawl? "Sprawl" is the unfortunate pejorative title government planners give to economic development that takes place in areas they can't control. In reality, "sprawl" is new houses, new school buildings, new plants, and new office and retail facilities. "Sprawl" is new jobs, new hope and the fulfillment of lifelong dreams. It's the American Dream unfolding before your eyes.
Today, if a company pulls up stakes, abandons a suburban location and moves into the central city (often doubling or tripling the commute time for its employees), the anti-American Dream doom-and- gloomers call it "economic revitalization," and they praise it.
But if a company, a residential builder, or a family moves out into the suburbs, it's condemned by the anti-American Dreamers. "It's sprawl," they hiss, "it's bad." They demand new laws be imposed turning local control over to state government planners charged with discouraging, containing, shutting down, stopping and reversing growth outside central cities.
The anti-American Dreamers would have you believe that suburban growth is at the root of all problems that beset our cities, both in Michigan and across our country. They seem to believe that citizens left thriving cities, and that it was their departure that caused high crime, high taxes, invisible public services, and failing public school systems.
Anybody who believes that line of thinking is taking denial to a whole new level. Sprawl did not cause the decline of the cities. Cities declined because they squandered their assets. High crime rates, high taxes, failing schools, foul air and a lack of open green spaces forced people to move.
Sprawlers, like me, simply wanted a home with green grass on a safe, well maintained street, a quality neighborhood school that actually educated their children, a good job, nearby parks and recreational spaces, and a local government that actually delivers the services their taxes paid for. In other words, they wanted a place like today's Oakland County.
Some of the more disingenuous anti-Dreamers complain that we are blacktopping Oakland County. They claim that our farms and forestland is being gobbled up by developers, those nasty people who build single family homes instead of high density housing projects. They are concerned that Oakland County, and indeed all of America, will soon be one big Blockbuster parking lot. But the facts refute their hysterical myths.
First, the truth is that any responsible examination of Oakland County's robust, vital and life-sustaining development clearly shows that the sky is not falling. Oakland County's satisfied residents, responsible business leaders, and the elected and appointed officials of our 62 cities, villages and townships have done a good job as stewards of Oakland's 910 square miles.
This is demonstrated by how we have developed our land resources.
Check it out: single family homes, a primary goal for many families seeking their share of the American Dream, take up 38.5 percent of the total land in Oakland County. Vacant land is the next largest land use, at 13.6 percent. Recreation and conservation uses (permanently set aside) follow at 13.3 percent. Lakes and rivers take 5.9 percent of our land area; agriculture uses 4.2 percent, industry follows at 4.2 percent, public spaces use 3.8 percent, and commercial uses account for only 2.1 percent. (The remaining 13.4 of land use is made up of utility right-of-ways, railroads, and mobile home parks.) We have a balance of land uses that works!
Secondly, according to readily available research, Michigan today is still 91 percent rural. And at the present rate of development, Michigan has a couple of millenniums left before it would be a totally urbanized state.
What about the claim that America is being paved over? Well, the total land in the United States is 3.6 million square miles. Of that total land mass, some 126,000 square miles are considered urbanized. This means that less than 3.5 percent of America is "developed" urban area.
Are the developers really gathering up all the farm land and forest acres for their own greedy purposes? Not hardly. Today there is more forested land in Michigan than there was 100 years ago. While the amount of land being used for farming is declining, it's not primarily because of development, but rather because of improved productivity within the farming industry itself.
Today, due to technological improvements, we grow and produce more products for market on substantially less land. In fact, a substantial percentage of our farming produce is now shipped overseas. We still easily feed ourselves as a nation.
One final myth debunker: How much land do we have? Try this: if every man, woman and child in America were forced to relocate to the State of Texas, each of us would have 3/5 acre to call our own.
So the next time you hear the word sprawl, embrace it. It simply means economic development. It means jobs. It means the freedom to choose. It translates into quality of life.
And the next time somebody rubs your face in the word sprawl, take a long, hard look at that person. Too often you will see some limousine liberal who long ago fled our cities. Now, they want others to go back and take their place. They want to use the power of government to force you back into a city, or a neighborhood, or a housing type they chose not to live in themselves. They want to force you back to the city to help purge themselves of their perceived sin of abandonment.
If you remember nothing else, please remember this: it's all about the pronoun "it". "It" is the subject of intense competition. "It" is the most sought after thing in the country. "It" is called economic development. If you don't have "it," and someone does, "it" is a bad thing called "sprawl." Ask yourself, if "it" is so evil, why do they want "it" so badly that they compete for "it," they give tax breaks to attract "it," give incentives and create enterprise zones to secure "it?" You know the answer.
L. Brooks Patterson
Oakland County Executive
To the doom and gloom crowd, "sprawl" ranks right up there with the plague, leprosy, and the French.
Well, let me state it unequivocally: I love sprawl. I need it. I promote it. Oakland County can't get enough of it. Are you getting the picture?
Sprawl is not evil. In fact, it is good. It is the inevitable result of a free people exercising their cherished, constitutionally protected rights as individuals to pursue their dreams when choosing where to live, where to work, where to educate, and where to recreate.
Let's stop the hysteria and honestly ask ourselves what is sprawl? "Sprawl" is the unfortunate pejorative title government planners give to economic development that takes place in areas they can't control. In reality, "sprawl" is new houses, new school buildings, new plants, and new office and retail facilities. "Sprawl" is new jobs, new hope and the fulfillment of lifelong dreams. It's the American Dream unfolding before your eyes.
Today, if a company pulls up stakes, abandons a suburban location and moves into the central city (often doubling or tripling the commute time for its employees), the anti-American Dream doom-and- gloomers call it "economic revitalization," and they praise it.
But if a company, a residential builder, or a family moves out into the suburbs, it's condemned by the anti-American Dreamers. "It's sprawl," they hiss, "it's bad." They demand new laws be imposed turning local control over to state government planners charged with discouraging, containing, shutting down, stopping and reversing growth outside central cities.
The anti-American Dreamers would have you believe that suburban growth is at the root of all problems that beset our cities, both in Michigan and across our country. They seem to believe that citizens left thriving cities, and that it was their departure that caused high crime, high taxes, invisible public services, and failing public school systems.
Anybody who believes that line of thinking is taking denial to a whole new level. Sprawl did not cause the decline of the cities. Cities declined because they squandered their assets. High crime rates, high taxes, failing schools, foul air and a lack of open green spaces forced people to move.
Sprawlers, like me, simply wanted a home with green grass on a safe, well maintained street, a quality neighborhood school that actually educated their children, a good job, nearby parks and recreational spaces, and a local government that actually delivers the services their taxes paid for. In other words, they wanted a place like today's Oakland County.
Some of the more disingenuous anti-Dreamers complain that we are blacktopping Oakland County. They claim that our farms and forestland is being gobbled up by developers, those nasty people who build single family homes instead of high density housing projects. They are concerned that Oakland County, and indeed all of America, will soon be one big Blockbuster parking lot. But the facts refute their hysterical myths.
First, the truth is that any responsible examination of Oakland County's robust, vital and life-sustaining development clearly shows that the sky is not falling. Oakland County's satisfied residents, responsible business leaders, and the elected and appointed officials of our 62 cities, villages and townships have done a good job as stewards of Oakland's 910 square miles.
This is demonstrated by how we have developed our land resources.
Check it out: single family homes, a primary goal for many families seeking their share of the American Dream, take up 38.5 percent of the total land in Oakland County. Vacant land is the next largest land use, at 13.6 percent. Recreation and conservation uses (permanently set aside) follow at 13.3 percent. Lakes and rivers take 5.9 percent of our land area; agriculture uses 4.2 percent, industry follows at 4.2 percent, public spaces use 3.8 percent, and commercial uses account for only 2.1 percent. (The remaining 13.4 of land use is made up of utility right-of-ways, railroads, and mobile home parks.) We have a balance of land uses that works!
Secondly, according to readily available research, Michigan today is still 91 percent rural. And at the present rate of development, Michigan has a couple of millenniums left before it would be a totally urbanized state.
What about the claim that America is being paved over? Well, the total land in the United States is 3.6 million square miles. Of that total land mass, some 126,000 square miles are considered urbanized. This means that less than 3.5 percent of America is "developed" urban area.
Are the developers really gathering up all the farm land and forest acres for their own greedy purposes? Not hardly. Today there is more forested land in Michigan than there was 100 years ago. While the amount of land being used for farming is declining, it's not primarily because of development, but rather because of improved productivity within the farming industry itself.
Today, due to technological improvements, we grow and produce more products for market on substantially less land. In fact, a substantial percentage of our farming produce is now shipped overseas. We still easily feed ourselves as a nation.
One final myth debunker: How much land do we have? Try this: if every man, woman and child in America were forced to relocate to the State of Texas, each of us would have 3/5 acre to call our own.
So the next time you hear the word sprawl, embrace it. It simply means economic development. It means jobs. It means the freedom to choose. It translates into quality of life.
And the next time somebody rubs your face in the word sprawl, take a long, hard look at that person. Too often you will see some limousine liberal who long ago fled our cities. Now, they want others to go back and take their place. They want to use the power of government to force you back into a city, or a neighborhood, or a housing type they chose not to live in themselves. They want to force you back to the city to help purge themselves of their perceived sin of abandonment.
If you remember nothing else, please remember this: it's all about the pronoun "it". "It" is the subject of intense competition. "It" is the most sought after thing in the country. "It" is called economic development. If you don't have "it," and someone does, "it" is a bad thing called "sprawl." Ask yourself, if "it" is so evil, why do they want "it" so badly that they compete for "it," they give tax breaks to attract "it," give incentives and create enterprise zones to secure "it?" You know the answer.
L. Brooks Patterson
Oakland County Executive
 |
| "Evil Suburban Sprawl" must make way for apartments. |
VIDEO: "Will our new neighbors be forced to live in a toxic environment?"
"Is Bridge Housing aware of the Microwave tower, toxic waste and the health effects of living so close to the freeway?"
Brad Wilban, Bridge Housing VP responds at the October 27, 2012 meeting at Mary Silvera School about the proposed Marinwood Village 82 unit low income family apartments.
What about the environmental INJUSTICE of warehousing people in this toxic environment?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)