Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

-Ch4s3- t1_izg9n8q wrote

Blocking improvements to amenities to keep down home prices is kind of perverse isn’t it? Surely his constituents deserve to benefit from the growing wealth of the city.

How does this even stop displacement? Won’t new and wealthier people eventually start buying up the limited housing stock in the neighborhood if nothing changes?

16

ifthereisnomirror t1_izgb94s wrote

People often don’t act in their own best interest.

A lot of the sentiment that I’ve encountered living in Johnson’s district for the past few decades is that people want things to stay the way that they are.

I don’t think it’s stopping change or displacement in the area, it’s inevitable.

Eventually a reasonable person will run and take the seat from him, it just hasn’t happened yet.

−3

-Ch4s3- t1_izgbqup wrote

I totally get the impulse to keep things the same, but it just isn’t realistic and cities have never stayed the same over decades. It’s a real failure of politicians to promise that they can freeze a neighborhood in amber.

It’s sad to me because space could be carved out to help people stay and to give them better city services while allowing the change to happen.

8

ifthereisnomirror t1_izgei2i wrote

Totally. If only we could get more honest politicians.

Maybe. Services cost money.

2

-Ch4s3- t1_izgf11y wrote

For sure, but a little population growth can generate a lot of revenue. The next few years might be tough but investments need to be long term in focus.

3