| ▲ | bahmboo 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Good infrastructure costs money. Citizens don't want to pay for it. The city workers have to figure out how to solve problems. Another fun one is talking about how much was accomplished decades ago when the streets were...decades newer. Go ahead and say it's mismanagement. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | herdcall 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We pay 7.25% sales tax in California, the highest in the country. Plus, county taxes can go up to 3.5%, adding up to 10.75% total. It's not too much to ask for basic stuff like maintaining the streets when paying this kind of money. The roads in Orange County, where I live, are great though. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bradchris 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I’m pretty sure Los Angeles is a city in which residents would _gladly_ vote to tax themselves for better streets if they’d actually get done, like Orange County has. In 2024, when Measure HLA passed via ballot measure (basically, legally requiring that the city must adhere to its own already decade-old repaving and mobility plan that had only been 3% implemented), the city tried to spook the public by saying it could ultimately increase taxes and cost $2bn over 10 years. That only increased support, with almost 66% of the city voting for it in the end. It’s worthwhile to note, measure HLA did not actually mandate anything new, just saying that the city must follow its own street plan, because for a decade the city has been pulling stuff like this rather than actually building ADA ramps or repaving. People want their sidewalks and streets and will gladly pay for them, not to mention the city already lost a Federal ADA lawsuit requiring this too. The city just won’t do it. I’m hoping this is the year the city finally gets sued under HLA (which carries a bounty award for any litigant who lives on a street ignored by the mobility plan if they do a faux repaving and don’t adhere to the law), now that the 2-year grace period is up. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | recursive 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Streets were only decades newer if they haven't been re-built since then. But when streets were new, they were built recently. That still provides evidence that is somehow possible to build streets. Did people want to pay for streets the first time they were constructed? Go ahead and say it's not mismanagement. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | hypeatei 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yeah this seems like a failure at the federal level. There should be incentives for city street departments to implement the newest standards, not "follow these rules, or else" type of thinking. LA residents now to have to deal with outdated ADA standards and half-assed repairs. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | themafia 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Citizens don't want to pay for it. Yes. We do. We're literally screaming for it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||