Leo_B Loc: Houston suburb

That's what got me banned for a while, replying to the thread and its contents and comments rather than replying to the section it's located in.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

You are quite obviously implying that what we have aren’t good enough and that folks from the city could improve what we have. If that is true, for example, why are so many city school corporations failing, while those in rural areas are doing fine? And why is crime so rampant in cities but not in the countrysides? We don’t need big city help.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

If the current administration has their way, Federal law will soon enable our government to restrict local municipalities from being able to establish zoning for single family homes. Then there will be little difference between here and there.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Wuligal Loc: Slippery Rock, Pa.

I was hoping someone would call attention to Biden's attempts to destroy the suburbs. As usual I have a question. I thought zoning laws and restrictions were the under the jurisdiction of locally elected officials, not the Federal government.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

It will be interesting to see if you and Bill have caused this topic to be moved to The Attic. Poor Jerry is having a run of bad luck with his "cartoons"

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

My home town in Western Kentucky is in a county with less than 10,000 people in 1963 when I graduated from high school. Our schools were very good because people knew that in each family only one or two of the children would take over the family farm or small business in town.
So the others needed an education to go elsewhere and make it financially. Many couldn't afford college so they did what I did, partly family help, partly work & school and partly Military for the GI Bill. The only reunion I went to (15th) of the 81 in my graduating class (Yes a small HS) about 1/4 were or had been teachers, 1/4 were or had been ministers/preachers (some of those were also teachers) most of the rest were farmers* and one of the other things or small business owners with some engineers, doctors, nurses, LEOs of one kind or another etc. thrown in. One guy who did attend was a Navy Captain and made Admiral a few months later, another classmate was commanding an Air Wing in Japan and sent a message and another was Captain of a super-tanker that on the day of the reunion was rounding the southern tip of Africa and sent a radio message to be read to us. There was also one of the women who graduated from one of the top journalism schools with honors and wrote for a major newspaper/magazine conglomerate - I don't remember which one.
So many country places have excellent schools, especially when compared to inner city schools in many of our failing cities, the failing cities that are causing a lot of "city people" to move to "the country". The big complaint most of my old friends and others have is not that they are city folk. It is that they come to the country/small city/small town to get away from those conditions and then many v**e for and advocate the same types of politicians and policies that ruined those cities and drove them out in the first place.

*Aprx 25% of farmers and ranchers have a 2 or 4 year college degree in Agriculture or related areas, to include some business since managing a farm is in effect managing a factory that happens to grow plants and animals.

Wuligal Loc: Slippery Rock, Pa.

I respect your efforts to preserve the integrity of UHH and protect Bill's cartoons. I apologize for not being more careful about my comments. Guess I forgot where I was away after reading the posts from: Whatdat, RobertJeri, Manglesphoto, Holtimer, StepheG, Watosh, 2D**gons, and Leo-B.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

It's true that many comments in this thread have skirted the edge of political commentary, which is not allowed in chit-chat per Admin's rules located here.

Unfortunately, as your sentence that I quoted demonstrates, some people feel compelled to make ridiculous assertions that wouldn't hold water in a thoughtful discussion based on t***h rather than emotion.

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

Us country people have more quiet, less interference in how we use our property, usually lower taxes, and more conservative ideas. We help & watch out for each other & therefore know more about what people in our area really need so we can REALLY help them when needed. We have museums, parks, & other amenities within driving distance & can donate time and/or money to organizations we believe in; not what some entity thinks we should through increased taxes or wh**ever. Nothing against city people per se; this diversity is one of the things that make this country great & make people want to come to this country. We live near a city that once had the attitude of diversity. Now it has become a liberal city the defunds the police, funds a bus system that has very low ridership, & believe if you keep throwing money at it then it makes it better whether it works or not. So, I respect city folks & believe in their right to live where they choose. The only problem I have is when people move to the country for what it has to offer, then want to change it to the way it is where they came from.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Hi Linda. I'm not sure but think your comment about ridiculous assertions was partially aimed at me. On the off chance it was, I would just say t***h is usually considered a valid defense and this post was not meant to be political.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

No. However, now that I've read an article (from April) about the proposal, I think that your comments do misrepresent the subject.

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

You may want to read the actual bill, as the media sometime spins the way they describe things. Detailed below are excerpts from the 'Housing, Opportunity, Mobility, and Equity Act of 2018':
__________________________________________________________

(B) include, as appropriate, policies relating to inclusive land use, such as—

(i) for the purpose of adding affordable units, increasing both the percentage and absolute number of affordable units
(I) authorizing high-density and multifamily zoning;
(II) eliminating off-street parking requirements;
(III) establishing density bonuses;
(IV) streamlining or shortening permitting processes and timelines;
(V) removing height limitations;
(VI) establishing by-right developments; and
VII) using property tax abatements; and
(VIII) relaxing lot size restrictions;
(ii) prohibiting source of income discrimination;
(iii) taxing vacant land or donating vacant land to nonprofit developers;
(iv) allowing accessory dwelling units;
(v) establishing development tax or value capture incentives; and
(vi) prohibiting landlords from asking prospective tenants for their criminal history;

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thanks Bill. You're saying that those provisions of the 2018 proposal are being incorporated into the 2021 version?

On the .gov site, part of the synopsis of the 2018 version is "(1) requires a recipient of a Community Development Block Grant to develop strategies to support new, inclusive zoning policies and programs."

In 2021, I read "the proposal would award grants and tax credits to cities that change zoning laws to bolster more equitable access to affordable housing."

I'm not seeing that anything will be forced on local governments, rather there will be incentives to invest. Obviously, there are both pros and cons to building multi-family units over single-family units, but like so much of our present and future, we need to face some hard realities. There is no going back to the "good old days."

A little joke from the 1970's in Maine: What's the difference between a developer and an environmentalist? A developer wants to build homes on a lake. An environmentalist already has a home on a lake

yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey

Yes Linda - those provisions are in the 2021 version. Currently local governments have the right to determine off-street parking requirements, maximum height of structures, lot size requirements, property tax abatements, and approve or deny accessory dwelling units (which are smaller, residential dwelling units located on the same lot as a stand-alone single-family home).

Should this bill become law, the Federal government will mandate what local communities can (and cannot do) regarding zoning. For example, removing height restrictions mean large apartment buildings can be erected in neighborhoods that were previously zoned (and priced) for single family homes. Removing minimum lot size requirements means builders can squeeze as many multi-family dwellings into any neighborhood where there is available property - or purchase larger existing homes, knock them down and build multiple small family dwellings on the property.

This bill is the Federal government's attempt to control what happens in your local community, whether you like it or not. And the scary thing is most people have never heard anything about it.

To read the actual bill, search on "S.3342 - Housing, Opportunity, Mobility, and Equity Act of 2018"