![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
livingdebToday I read an article in the college paper mentioning two people I've met. The article was about a country and western dance club (or maybe it's supposed to be called "country western" now) on campus which was started by these guys. My favorite quote: "I'm not your average cowboy. I'm Asian and I hate country music, but this is my passion." I'm thinking we need to make a CD of good country songs to give him.
**
I also read an editorial against subsidizing retail. The author explained that the city is giving The Domain tax breaks, but that this deal was based on wrong information and that a lost law suit resulted in the city no longer being tied to these tax incentives. However, city council wants to pay them anyway to honor the agreement. The agreement was apparently passed in a single week, not allowing for much voter input. Normally I would think it's too late and there's nothing we can do, just like with the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac buyout fiasco, but I would be wrong.
A group formed to create an amendment to the city charter and got enough signatures to get it on November's ballot. You can read the language of the Amendment and ballot. It prohibits subsidizing any development that includes retail uses. There is some disagreement on whether this language means it would also affect mixed-use development like that at the old airport which people seem to like more because it includes supposedly affordable housing. It definitely prohibits future payments even on deals that have already been made, which sounds bad unless they are all brother-in-law deals anyway. And it definitely still allows for manufacturing development.
This is an area where I don't particularly trust my city. Based on what I currently know, I'm voting for the amendment against retail subsidies.
**
It really is too late to do anything about the Fannie Mae Freddie Mac thing, right? (Don't you love how CEOs who are ousted because they run a company into the ground get huge severance packages whereas regular people who screw up are fired or at best laid off and thus qualify for unemployment benefits?) I don't suppose there's any reasonable way to prohibit companies from getting so big that they cannot be allowed to fail, is there?
All those classes in government and I really have no clue about how to be a proper citizen besides voting. And I have very few clues about that.
**
I also read an editorial against subsidizing retail. The author explained that the city is giving The Domain tax breaks, but that this deal was based on wrong information and that a lost law suit resulted in the city no longer being tied to these tax incentives. However, city council wants to pay them anyway to honor the agreement. The agreement was apparently passed in a single week, not allowing for much voter input. Normally I would think it's too late and there's nothing we can do, just like with the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac buyout fiasco, but I would be wrong.
A group formed to create an amendment to the city charter and got enough signatures to get it on November's ballot. You can read the language of the Amendment and ballot. It prohibits subsidizing any development that includes retail uses. There is some disagreement on whether this language means it would also affect mixed-use development like that at the old airport which people seem to like more because it includes supposedly affordable housing. It definitely prohibits future payments even on deals that have already been made, which sounds bad unless they are all brother-in-law deals anyway. And it definitely still allows for manufacturing development.
This is an area where I don't particularly trust my city. Based on what I currently know, I'm voting for the amendment against retail subsidies.
**
It really is too late to do anything about the Fannie Mae Freddie Mac thing, right? (Don't you love how CEOs who are ousted because they run a company into the ground get huge severance packages whereas regular people who screw up are fired or at best laid off and thus qualify for unemployment benefits?) I don't suppose there's any reasonable way to prohibit companies from getting so big that they cannot be allowed to fail, is there?
All those classes in government and I really have no clue about how to be a proper citizen besides voting. And I have very few clues about that.