A2 local politics filter: I really liked this piece by MGoBlog about the upcoming election.

Been thinking about this quote for the past day:

“Denying the fact that Ann Arbor will change with weak appeals to parking, traffic, and floodplain development is pure NIMBYism and should be rejected out of hand. Keeping Ann Arbor “funky” or “unique,” which seems to be the main goal cited by development opponents, is 1) impossible and 2) detrimental to everyone in the community who isn’t already locked into a mortgage they intend to keep until they die.”

We’ve been in A2 for 8ish years now (I really need to do the math on that). I’ve said goodbye to A LOT of people who would have loved, or at least liked, to settle down here, but it just doesn’t make financial sense. The only way out of that is to build more places for people to live (or to make it unattractive to investors looking to diversify their investments by buying up single family homes, but good luck defending that position (shout out to my landlord friends! I don’t hold this against you and would do the same if we had the capital!)).

Unless, of course, you don’t want new people to settle down here. If that’s the plan, well, yeah, don’t do a thing to anything.

My wife and I were able to buy in because of generational wealth, two steady incomes, and a willingness to put in sweat equity. Yes, it’d be easier money-wise if we didn’t have a kid. I’d like to think that “raising future consumers and citizens” shouldn’t preclude home ownership though. If prices continue trending upwards as quickly as they are we wouldn’t be able to afford to be within the city limits in a few years.

Anyway, long-winded and not very concise way of saying I’m voting for Ackerman for Ward 3 because he’s pro-development. My political stance these days is that we should so many buildings that you wonder how in the world so many buildings could be built at the same time.