From the @sltrib:
https://www.sltrib.com/news/2024/12/23/slc-cracks-down-boarded-up/
"A new financial analysis shows it is costing the city nearly $15,551 per boarded-up structure per year to respond."
"Property owners will now pay from an initial $3,000 up to $9,000 per year to keep a residential building vacant and boarded, depending on how long it sits. Higher fees now apply for commercial buildings, with registration at between $6,000 in the first two years and a maximum of $14,000 annually when they are vacant six years or more."
I don't understand.
They're complaining about how much this costs in just money per year, but they're subsidizing the owners' choice to leave the property vacant by not passing on the full costs.
And they're trying their best to ignore the primary human need for shelter by keeping homeless people out of them.
Why not condemn or otherwise take the buildings back and use them as low/no-income housing? Oh, yeah. Because rich people should get returns on their investments. Forget the actual people trying to survive.
[#]utpol #SaltLake #SLC #homeless
=> More informations about this toot | View the thread | More toots from katrinakatrinka@infosec.exchange
=> View utpol tag | View saltlake tag | View homeless tag | View slc tag This content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).Proxy Information
text/gemini