Greenhouse Gas / Anti-Sprawl Bill
Posted 03 October 2008 - 09:05 AM
Here's a link to SB 375:
We have someone from Steinberg's office here, so hopefully they can weigh in and answer any questions you may have
Posted 12 October 2008 - 11:20 AM
That being said...Urban Sprawl can be a problem IF it paves over fertile farmland needed for agriculture. Clearly there is more short term profit in development than in farming. Farming though is a national security interest.
So taking it as a whole I am ambivalent on this new law, and I will wait and see what happens.
This law will not reduce global carbon emissions as is it's stated goal, the real goal is to control private property. Even If the entire united states ceased using internal combustion engines, China, India and Russia, who have over half the earths population, will continue to fill our atmosphere with carbon emissions.
This bill will do nothing to mandate mass transit or raising the carbon emission standards for automobiles. So in effect..it does nothing except drive up property values in areas that are deemed acceptable to the "Commission" for development.
I suspect certain developers like Phil Angelides and his family the Tsakopoulos Mob (They own Steinberg/Fargo et al.. outright) have gobbled up all the available land in areas considered "developable" by the Commission in the Central Valley. Someone should investigate this.
Posted 16 October 2008 - 08:42 AM
Isn't there a moratorium on new building/construction projects in the Natomas area due to the levees anyhow? (I'm not sure and I may be wrong - hence why I am asking.)