"DOI will work with HUD to identify lands to offload for the development of affordable homes"

[grainhog]

Blindly choosing to believe that politicians have our best interests at heart, when all their words and actions obviously and indisputably (read the article) indicate the opposite; with the ostensible non-plan to remain silent and obedient and then maybe impotently and retroactively react later; weakens our ability to assert our will and resist the establishment of new land transfer precedent.

*fify

In your anology, what is "nuking the mold" and "injecting insulin"? Organizing and communicating to reps that land transfer is unacceptable? A disingenuous and inaccurate argument. That's fixing the leak and eating healthy/exercising.

If some garbage you saw somewhere once on public land, or that you never saw a buck in a particular spot, constitutes proof for you that the associated ground is better off under town homes and parking lots, then I wouldn't know where to begin to dispell the misunderstanding.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

*fify

In your anology, what is "nuking the mold" and "injecting insulin"? Organizing and communicating to reps that land transfer is unacceptable? A disingenuous and inaccurate argument. That's fixing the leak and eating healthy/exercising.

If some garbage you saw somewhere once on public land, or that you never saw a buck in a particular spot, constitutes proof for you that the associated ground is better off under town homes and parking lots, then I wouldn't know where to begin to dispell the misunderstanding.

What lands do you think will be sold for "affordable housing" that are worth keeping? Nobody is building townhomes and parking lots in the mountains or plains we consider our playgrounds, they'll be in the cities or suburbs near towns that have been gobbled up anyway. I disagree with the premise that we should just keep any and all lands because we have them. There are very likely some that are better off swapped with other properties and some that are more of a burden and worthless. All lands are not the same. If these people working with the states to identify lands that could be useful for affordable housing projects are something worth keeping then we fight, until then we're just screaming at an empty space with no targets. They very likely will come back unable to identify any good targets and not have anything at all transferred off. All I'm saying is instead of screaming into the air lets obtain a target and scream at a target. This isn't it, this is right now a big nothing burger.

 

[Jbehredt]

They’re building “poor people reservations”. Except this time the feds keep the gambling profits. And drugs and alcohol are encouraged!

 

[TaperPin]

Giving billionares land for new developments as political favors to developers makes me sick.

Has anyone taken a tour of any new “affordable” housing developments? We were curious and looked a few hundred lots under construction. Instead of million dollar homes, they squeeze two smaller $500k track homes into a smaller lot. 4’ from the sides of the walls to the property lines, 16’ front and back yards, no sidewalks, no street parking. This is pure developer greed - giving this kind of land way should give everyone pause.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

Giving billionares land for new developments as political favors to developers makes me sick.

Has anyone taken a tour of any new “affordable” housing developments? We were curious and looked a few hundred lots under construction. Instead of million dollar homes, they squeeze two smaller $500k track homes into a smaller lot. 4’ from the sides of the walls to the property lines, 16’ front and back yards, no sidewalks, no street parking. This is pure developer greed - giving this kind of land way should give everyone pause.

People need to live somewhere. If you don't squash them in densely for the city dwellers then they'll take up twice as much space. Are you proposing they jettison twice as much land to accommodate housing needs? I love highrise cramped apartment complexes, stack them up high for the people who want to live there so the overall footprint is less on the land.

 

[TaperPin]

People need to live somewhere. If you don't squash them in densely for the city dwellers then they'll take up twice as much space. Are you proposing they jettison twice as much land to accommodate housing needs? I love highrise cramped apartment complexes, stack them up high for the people who want to live there so the overall footprint is less on the land.

There are open fields right next to all these developments, developers just don’t want to pay the price. Why would they when the oligarchs have convinced you to give land away? You’ve already agreed to give the land away - why not give away Forest Service sage covered foothills on the other side of the valley? Why not prime spots?

Unbelievable.

Do you think developers like Harland Crow give two schitts about how normal people live, or where they live? But you’re lined up to give him welfare in the form of free land. Literally welfare.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

There are open fields right next to all these developments, developers just don’t want to pay the price. Why would they when the oligarchs have convinced you to give land away? You’ve already agreed to give the land away - why not give away Forest Service sage covered foothills on the other side of the valley? Why not prime spots?

Unbelievable.

Do you think developers like Harland Crow give two schitts about how normal people live, or where they live? But you’re lined up to give him welfare in the form of free land. Literally welfare.

lol, you've got it bad my dude. This isn't such a simple black and white good vs evil, there's a lot of cards in play and a lot of needs of a lot of people all the way around. You can't even identify any land that's actually being given away, that's the problem. They only said there's gonna look around and see if something makes sense. Hold your screaming for when something, if ever, develops from this and then unleash on them if they step in the wrong direction.

 

[TaperPin]

if something makes sense.

In your mind you’ve already given them permission without knowing anything about their choices - what “makes sense” to you and to the developers this is intended to benefit will likely be quite different. Show me one developer that isn’t acting in their own best interest. Based on the genius management skills shown across all departments I’m not hopeful.

 

[ScreamingPotato]

In your mind you’ve already given them permission without knowing anything about their choices - what “makes sense” to you and to the developers this is intended to benefit will likely be quite different. Show me one developer that isn’t acting in their own best interest. Based on the genius management skills shown across all departments I’m not hopeful.

lol Taper, you're just making stuff up now.
My pitchfork is ready when the time comes, this ain't it.

 

[TaperPin]

lol Taper, you're just making stuff up now.
My pitchfork is ready when the time comes, this ain't it.

This is a small whackadoodle distraction to flood the news cycle, but it doesn’t go unnoticed. The bigger issues you should be using that pitchfork on are well under way.

 

[Ozarkansas]

A year ago we had a thread about how Project 2025 involved public land transfer. “Don’t worry about Project 2025, Trump has disavowed all knowledge of it! You’re getting worked up over something that will probably never happen” We were told, as Vance advocated for building homes on public land in the VP debate.

A month ago we had another thread about the impacts of DOGE to public lands. Again, mostly the same people said “Nothing has happened yet, call me when it does, this is all TDS.” I watched the goalposts shift from “nobody is firing public land employees” to “all those public land employees probably weren’t doing anything anyway” over the course of 26 pages. But the good news is that the guys saying we all had TDS assured us that they would fight to defend public lands, and that if this administration ever actually came after public lands they would stand against it.

Now we have the administration itself openly saying “yeah we want to develop on public lands- and that’s a good thing” and I’m hearing crickets or “let’s hear them out” from the people who just a month ago thought I was a liberal for even bringing it up.

 

[MallardSX2]

The real crux of the issue is that there are run-down $hitholes all over this country that would be great places to burn down and re-build. Tens of millions of run-down homes and vacant lots actually. However, planning and permitting is preventing a lot of these places from being economically viable with the overburden of RIDICULOUS Regulations to build in these locations and fix these houses up. Believe it or not, it can be cheaper to pick up and move and build new depending on some of the permitting hurdles that some boards make you face.

So, if ya want to point the finger at someone for this happening it should be pointed at the local municipalities planning and zoning boards across this country that are filled with knuckleheads who want to make every project a permitting nightmare.... just so they can justify their pure existence as a "Government Employees".

Now, the Federal "Government is stepping in and is here to help!"

 

[ianpadron]

DOI proposing to transfer federal land to states for the express purpose of development for profit.

Is this still "fear mongering"?

Yes

 

[TaperPin]

The real crux of the issue is that there are run-down $hitholes all over this country that would be great places to burn down and re-build. Tens of millions of run-down homes and vacant lots actually. However, planning and permitting is preventing a lot of these places from being economically viable with the overburden of RIDICULOUS Regulations to build in these locations and fix these houses up. Believe it or not, it can be cheaper to pick up and move and build new depending on some of the permitting hurdles that some boards make you face.

So, if ya want to point the finger at someone for this happening it should be pointed at the local municipalities planning and zoning boards across this country that are filled with knuckleheads who want to make every project a permitting nightmare.... just so they can justify their pure existence as a "Government Employees".

Now, the Federal "Government is stepping in and is here to help!"

So are you saying local and state governments aren’t good at managing themselves so we should have MORE federal government involvement?

I do agree it would be nice to have more policies that encourage rebuilding run down areas.

 

[ianpadron]

You're spot on. No one is building a subdivision in the Bob Marshall or Frank Church.

There are parcels of next to useless BLM land all over the intermountain West that 100% make sense to build housing on.

I get a kick out of all the guys upset about this...but they're the first ones to complain about the lack of housing.

Want to know a great way to lower the price of housing? Build more of it on dirt that was purchased cheap, and get rid of the red tape (permits/mitigation/hookup fees/etc)

I just don't see any "affordable homes" being built anywhere we're concerned about. There may be useless property that we're wasting money maintaining near a big city or something that could be good candidates. Once they identify some properties I have my pitchfork on standby to raise hell about it if it doesn't look good. There's also a lot of big talk about doing this and that but a lot of it is just talk and not going anywhere, example a certain list we're supposed to get names of that we're still waiting on. You get the picture.

edit: OP, did you change the wording of the article link for effec

 

[MallardSX2]

So are you saying local and state governments aren’t good at managing themselves so we should have MORE federal government involvement?

I do agree it would be nice to have more policies that encourage rebuilding run down areas.

No actually. I am not saying that. At all. I'm basically saying that the Government is full of dip$hits at all levels.

We need LESS government "assistance" and overreach, not more.....

 

[Ozarkansas]

You're spot on. No one is building a subdivision in the Bob Marshall or Frank Church.

There’s a lot of grey area before you get to the Bob Marshall and Frank Church. Plenty of federal land that butts up against urban areas has a lot of recreation and wildlife value. I don’t want to lose the <500 acre outholdings any more than I want to lose the big blocks.

 

[ianpadron]

I don't disagree.

Fact is that the country has a massive housing shortage, estimated at 4-5M homes, much of that in the West.

Every house in the country is built on top of what used to be habitat for critters.

There absolutely is a right way to develop housing...and until I see this proposed land sale is being comprised of critical winter range or high value rec property, I'm willing to see it through.

There’s a lot of grey area before you get to the Bob Marshall and Frank Church. Plenty of federal land that butts up against urban areas has a lot of recreation and wildlife value. I don’t want to lose the <500 acre outholdings any more than I want to lose the big blocks.

 

[TaperPin]

No actually. I am not saying that. At all. I'm basically saying that the Government is full of dip$hits at all levels.

We need LESS government "assistance" and overreach, not more.....

Isn’t giving land to billionaire developers a form of handout? Welfare for developers? Lowering their taxes is another handout. Welfare 2x.

If houses are sold at the market rate, as they all are, those built with low cost land or identical existing private land would sell for the exact same price. Where did the money go from the land giveaway - into the pocket of the developer.

 

[MallardSX2]

WTF are you rambling about? I think you are 100% missing my point. Go back and re-read my posts dude.

Isn’t giving land to billionaire developers a form of handout? Welfare for developers? Lowering their taxes is another handout. Welfare 2x.

If houses are sold at the market rate, as they all are, those built with low cost land or identical existing private land would sell for the exact same price. Where did the money go from the land giveaway - into the pocket of the developer.