I do indeed.
And I guess I can bend some on the value of government dictating things, spearheaded by unelected experts, in this case. Those things often get a bad rap, but maybe you can convince me otherwise.
(I do think one challenge is the maintaining property value thing. I can buy it on the commercial side, to a degree. But it's often cited as a goal of local government policy on the residential side, and that strikes me as something that frankly shouldn't be a goal of communal action)
There is far more accountability at the local level of government. Everyone watches like a hawk. If some community planner makes poor decisions that the elected counsel or board consistently disagrees with, that planner will be gone. And if not, the counsel or board gets voted out. And they know it. They have to govern for the people.
Sometimes they have to make tough decisions too, like allowing for an affordable housing solution. The best ones I've worked with have done a good job of working with developers to find solutions. In my old town, the counsel worked with my client on finding a suitable property, after turning her down on her original site.
It does not work that way with state and federal government, where it's their way or nothing.
There was one exception I've seen. I was working for a well-connected developer on a project along the Chicago River. The Army Corps twat told us in a meeting that it would take an Act of Congress to get the project done.
The local US rep for that area of Chicago and the two US Senators from Illinois called the Army Corps top boss.
The project got done. Act of Congress, I guess. And it's a fantastic project. We won awards for that one.
The twat still works for the Army Corps.
