Fair exchange
- Share via
Citing fairness to property owners, Roger Pilon praises Proposition 90, which would cause governmental agencies (and therefore taxpayers) to pay for restrictions on land use that “result in substantial economic loss” (Opinion, Oct. 30). This provision would seemingly apply if someone’s real property is down-zoned or if building height restrictions are imposed.
I contend that fairness to taxpayers necessitates a provision that would operate in both directions. When a property owner gets a conditional-use permit or a zone change increasing the permitted level of development, the owner should pay the governmental agency (taxpayers) the increased value of the property.
FRED HOEPTNER
La Crescenta
Inside the business of entertainment
The Wide Shot brings you news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
