Revision as of 06:46, 11 February 2018 (view source) imported>Jhestia No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 06:46, 11 February 2018 (view source) imported>Jhestia No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 327:   Line 349 ⟶ 350: Greg Morrow‏ @gregmorrow [https://twitter.com/gregmorrow/status/962104297700802561 3:21 PM - 9 Feb 2018]<br/> I also suggested using base/max densities, wherein over base = local amenity fund contribute to pay for local community's self-determined top priorities (e.g. parks, cleanup, safety, childcare, etc). Bottom line: local communities must benefit more directly from redevelopment. Greg Morrow‏ @gregmorrow [https://twitter.com/gregmorrow/status/962106039263899649 3:28 PM - 9 Feb 2018]<br/> "Planners and policy-makers, esp in LA, have typically used a hammer and screwdriver to achieve outcomes. But there are many more tools in the toolbox, esp fiscal tools, e.g. land value capture, Mello-Roos special assessment districts, contributions to community amenity funds, etc." <br/>   ~~ ~~ ==== Richard K. Green - auction off development rights ==== Richard K. Green‏ @keynesianr [https://twitter.com/keynesianr/status/962103896339488768 3:20 PM - 9 Feb 2018]<br/> Replying to @gregmorrow @drschweitzer @markvalli<br/> "Or even better, auction off the development rights.  That would maximize revenue."

SB827: Difference between revisions

SB827 (view source)