• StructuredPair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    But those regulations are largely controlled by local governments, not the federal government. Federal regulations can prevent building new housing in certain areas and conditions (like destroying habitat of an endangered species), but that is much rarer than a city council not approving projects or zoning changes because they want to keep property values high.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      And that needs to change. Local communities are harming the nation with their NIMBY shit. Feds should step in.

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          29 days ago

          You’ll never believe this, but you can actually add a regulation that removes or negates other regulations, resulting in overall fewer regulations.

          • StructuredPair@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            29 days ago

            That depends heavily on how you are counting regulations in this case. You are increasing the number of enforced federal regulations while the regulations at the local level may be increased, decreased, or unchanged based on how local regulations interact with the federal regulation.

          • StructuredPair@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            29 days ago

            It is in the figure as a part of the housing policy proposal of a presidential campaign. The executive of the federal government doesn’t control city councils so it must be federal regulations that will be impacted.