California’s redevelopment law was designed to revive inner-city
neighborhoods by giving city planners extra powers to invest tax
dollars and direct development decisions in areas that were deemed
to be blighted. It morphed into a financial sleight of hand,
whereby officials subsidized auto malls and hotels to divert tax
revenues that would go elsewhere.
Property-rights activists loathed redevelopment because it gave cities an excuse to take property via eminent domain and give it to developers who had “better” plans for the property. Anything eyed by these agencies, critics said, became “blight.”
Even many redevelopment supporters — who point to the revival of San Diego’s Gaslamp Quarter and other projects as proof of its success — admit that agencies sometimes abused their power. But in the end, their financial approach was their undoing.
http://reason.com/archives/2013/08/23/california-lawmakers-continue-to-undermi
Property-rights activists loathed redevelopment because it gave cities an excuse to take property via eminent domain and give it to developers who had “better” plans for the property. Anything eyed by these agencies, critics said, became “blight.”
Even many redevelopment supporters — who point to the revival of San Diego’s Gaslamp Quarter and other projects as proof of its success — admit that agencies sometimes abused their power. But in the end, their financial approach was their undoing.
http://reason.com/archives/2013/08/23/california-lawmakers-continue-to-undermi
No comments:
Post a Comment