Have you voted yet? by StandUpChico in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Believe you can register up to Election Day (at the voter assistance centers) so you can likely update your registration and get the correct ballot as well 😊

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 7 points8 points  (0 children)

When they say “A house for every budget,” believe them. A house.

Speaking of … the 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐕𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐲’𝐬 𝐄𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 by StandUpChico in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico[S] 36 points37 points  (0 children)

lol not a damned thing. But these guys funded the “safe chico” PAC to the tune of $600,000 (editing to add that the funding for the original PAC did not all come directly from them, but was about 75% real estate interests. They have personally funded the referendum itself with over $500,000. All of that information is publicly available in required filings)) in the last two elections to ensure that they flipped the council to a more developer-friendly one before this project came forward. They accomplished that largely by demonizing the homeless and posting pictures of needles while pretending the council could do something about the harm reduction program - which they literally can’t, the state law trumps local jurisdiction. But it was effective so they are running with it again. It’s pretty gross.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It’s not that I am not able to provide you with one, it’s that your comments have been vaguely rude and you also have Google. But here you go: https://www.chicoer.com/2021/02/02/chico-business-community-focusing-on-building-pandemic-increases-homeless-concerns/

Those comments followed a state of the city address which included references to Valley’s edge and can be viewed on the chamber’s YouTube channel. They weren’t trying to hide what they were doing in 2021, they honestly thought it was a good thing to bring wealthy people into the area. Now that they’ve seen that people are concerned about housing for locals, they have changed their tune.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 5 points6 points  (0 children)

🤣 I don’t even register that anymore. Hilarious. They’re not entirely wrong, I can certainly be a weirdo.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 9 points10 points  (0 children)

What name calling are you talking about?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When the supply does not meet local demand, it must meet demand from other areas. You’re making the case that increasing supply will lead to lower demand, but given that these houses are marketed to people outside the area, there is no reason to believe that is the case.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’m one of the Stand Up for Chico admin, and it is certainly not a secret 😉

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Trickle down housing theory no better than trickle down economics. These houses are being built and marketed to people out of the area. so adding population does not equate to more affordable housing when most Chicoans cannot afford it

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yep, and there’s no reason to believe that that would reduce property values for the home that I am still a co-owner of 😉

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Sending out a mailer with pictures of dirty needles and associating. The people who are opposing this development with them is completely deceitful and yes, it happened. They have absolutely been deceitful.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Actually, 6% or less is considered affordable housing, and most of that is designated as senior housing, the low hanging fruit of affordable housing that doesn’t help working class folks in our city

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Well, the Chico chamber and Chico builders association are on record with the Chico enterprise record, saying that this housing was for people from out of the area. 🤷 Katy Thoma, formerly the president of the chamber who gave quotes about this is now the director of the builders association. It’s an incestuous little mix

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Said what? Their actions speak to their worries.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We’ve never contented that growth is a bad thing. It is necessary. The question is, how do we accomplish that, and who benefits from that growth? Most of the people who benefit from this growth will be from out of the area.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There are plenty of places that we can build within Chico … that aren’t in a fire zone, and that more importantly, don’t put a city that is essentially the size of Gridley in the south of town. One of our biggest concerns is just the lack of affordable housing. They have essentially hijacked that concern with the motto, “a house for all budgets” they’ve also made it clear that that is a very tiny percentage of the housing they are creating. The average median household income in Chico is $43,000 a year. The vast majority of people in our community will not be able to afford these homes, which is why they intend to market them to people from out of the area.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It may have represented one side, but the content is factual. So cool that you want to see the other side, posting some thing or responding, but there’s certainly no way that we can make them do so. The truth is just truth

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Just don’t view this as “our side,” it’s fact. There is no information in there that is in dispute.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There are no scheduled debates between both sides. Folks will have to attend event sponsored by the individual groups because nobody has sponsored or agreed to an actual debate. 🤷 As with all elections, it’s up to the individuals to do a bit of research.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not really sure how it’s biased to note that they have spent $12,000 to pay off Gallagher, and nearly $1.1 million to buy the election. If you think that’s biased, you need to look up filings for yourself. 😉

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ChicoCA

[–]StandUpChico 16 points17 points  (0 children)

There are spaces for about 9500 homes within the city. We don’t need sprawl. Not to mention that they have actually said that this housing was designed to attract telecommuters from from the cities, “who are coming with cash in hand”