(01-16-2025, 06:19 PM)Jag149 Wrote:

(01-16-2025, 05:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: Why are you allowed to criticize California's park land management when you won't allow me to criticize California's zoning?  It's hypocrisy.

You are welcome to criticize them. We were discussing the reason for the fire. The root cause was not zoning, it was not executing simple land management processes for many years. Money needed to do this was diverted to other agendas that in the end put the public at risk. There was also a break down in the initial response to the first fire.  

This is not the first time you have tried to "steer" conversations to how people zone property. I have no idea nor care to know why you have the need to promote multi family zoning. If you want to discuss zoning and how that is done why don't you begin a thread on that? You can pontificate all you want. Zoning had very, very little impact on the fire. You may disagree, but it is kind of a silly thing to think in my opinion.

ps, you do know most can see your attempts to steer conversations right?

The fires were caused either by power lines or arson.
They were made more deadly and more costly by drought, insurance regulation, park land management, funding strategies for the local fire departments, and zoning.
Why zoning? There would be fewer tightly packed homes crammed on those hillsides if they allowed more homes in the valleys. It's not me. It's just math.

And what's wrong with steering conversations? You guys decided to talk about the insurance regulations. I didn't criticize anyone for steering the conversation that way.

---