Brilliant.
Not where I live.
> a simple diesel or natural gas generator is a far cheaper method of getting power during an outage.
Not self-sustainable. The goal is completely self-contained energy generation. Dependence on externally sourced fuels fails the requirements.
(I know the answer is yes, because the answer to this kind of question is always yes...)
We nearly all have choices. We can pound our heads on the desk until we bleed.
It is about power. The individual building a house has no power. The local government has lots of power.
Local governments (and the associated utility companies) here in New Zealand are notorious for dreadfully bad planning and mindless bureaucracy. It sounds like it is the same there
In a free society one would think having 'property rights' would enable one to build on owned land and that public infrastructure would be paid out of public funds also known as taxes. If the property taxes aren't adequate to pay for utility infrastructure, that's a legislative problem.
LA doesn't seem to be failing, though. I mean, I get that regulation is unfair, and surely they're doing suboptimal things like every bureaucracy. Yet, the lights are on, the toilets are flushing and the ambulances are arriving.
I don't see how demanding the third largest metropolis on the continent switch to a "hook it up or don't, your call" policy is going to do anything but make things much, much worse.
Basically: your argument is predicated on the idea that you personally don't need to do these things because everyone else already did and you don't need the incremental advantages. But give everyone that choice, and no streets will be lit, no roads will be paved, and power and sewage will be plumbed only to neighborhoods that will collectively pay for it. That's the way it works in most of the developing world, and it sucks. No freeloading. If you want to live in the urban core of Los Angeles you need to be willing to live like your fellow Angelenos.
For non-metro, utilities should allow micro grids if they are using mostly renewable power. Microgrids can be significantly more reliable when the grid alternative requires long HV lines without redundancy. And from a fire perspective, distributed generation is a huge win -- ever with a grid interconnection for winter, you can de-energize during peak fire risk and run off PV and batteries.
How about this instead: the property developer should pay, we can have a "building code" that sets standards for all residential constructions and disallow building any new housing that doesn't meet it. That way the costs are borne not by the individual home purchaser but by the investor class speculating on new housing development.
Which is exactly what the upthread poster is doing! They aren't an "individual" as commonly understood (i.e. someone who just wants a home to live in). They bought an empty/undeveloped piece of land and want to put a home there. Well, someone has to pay for that home to be of acceptable quality, who do you suggest?
1) pass the (excessive) costs on to the property sales price
or:
2) not speculate (and not build the house)
The OP has chosen one of the possible ways to have a home to live, you either buy an existing one or buy a plot of land and build a new one on it.
Are there other ways that you can suggest?
Around here, PG&E wanted to charge us $10K to remove a poll and move an existing transformer to an existing poll (and would take years to "engineer" the solution and schedule the work, despite it being a few hours of work for one crew).
No idea what a residential transformer goes for, but I guarantee it's not a significant fraction of the $75K bill.
It is also insane that they are moving polls and not burying the lines.
I thought they were forcing you to run some election polls.
Yeah. Completely new feeder. From what I saw it wasn't a ton of work, maybe a few hours, but hours nonetheless.
Poles, transformers, roads? That's what people pay taxes for. The government should deal with it.
I have done a bunch of construction work in Los Angeles county, including designing and building my own solar array. The only way I can describe the process, rules and the people involved is using words such as "surreal", "brutal", "nonsensical", "damaging", "expensive", "frustrating" and more. I cannot say anything positive about it. Nothing we do in this domain is designed to help people complete projects efficiently and at reasonable a cost.
If I can help it, I am never investing another dime in Los Angeles county. Even better, we have been planning a move out of California. This also means taking our businesses and employees out of this place. It's a mess.
Most businesses leaving California report growing losses after they leave. A lot of them fail.
As it turns out, the problem was never California. The problem was that they just couldn't cut it in a competitive environment that doesn't coddle business owners.
These kinds of comments usually come from people who know nothing about running a non-trivial business.
Simple example: Only business owners/operators know about the city of Los Angeles Business Property tax.
What is it?
Most people would guess it's like the property taxes assessed on homes. Not so. Not even close.
This is a tax the city imposes on any business operating in or through the county. If you so much as drive through the county you have to pay it.
What do they tax?
Your desks, chairs, printers, computers, workbenches, tools, paper shredder, equipment (for example, all the machinery in a CNC shop). They even tax tenant improvements. If you lease a commercial space, paint the walls and perhaps build a few divider walls, they tax that. If you have cubiles, they will take the dividers. Etc.
"Business property", for lack of a better description, refers to all objects owned by the business, including things like the garbage cans under every desk.
Imagine paying taxes on your desks and computers to the city of Los Angeles FOREVER.
Surreal? Yeah.
Real? Absolutely.
Fucking crazy? Without a doubt.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Where do you think businesses get this city tax money from? Well, they add it to their cost equation and the prices they charge are adjusted incrementally in order to maintain the profit margin they might need to conduct business, R&D, grow, have a financial cushion (you know, pandemics and shit), etc.
If costs go up, prices go up.
If prices go up, you become less competitive with lower cost-basis geographies.
If you are less competitive with other geographies due to your underlying cost structure, buyers will migrate to providers in those regions.
That could be nationally or international.
When buyers migrate, you struggle to survive, might have to downsize or just move to those locations.
In the long run, jobs are lost and businesses leave.
Look what they are doing now in CA with regards to rooftop solar. They are going to kill off the entire industry.
> Most businesses leaving California report growing losses after they leave.
Stop watching CNN brother. You are in the Matrix. This is patently false. I know so many who have left and thrived in places like Arizona and Texas that I have probably lost count. Lots of these have taken valuable talent with them.
In our case, most of our business is international or aerospace-related. So long as we are in the US, it really doesn't matter where we are. You can't manufacture shit here in California anyway, the underlying costs are very high. The difference in cost structure for suppliers we have here and in other states is hard to comprehend unless you are ready to understand and accept the fact that imposing high taxes and high regulatory costs on businesses, in the long run, is highly destructive. Most people don't have a good sense of what business looks like under the hood, so, no, I don't expect most to truly understand this.
You might want to read this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adammillsap/2021/08/27/business...
and this:
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/12/15/california-pulls-the-...
Watch this:
What's Behind California's 'Business Exodus'
They blamed taxes, moved to Texas or some other "low tax" state, and discovered the problem wasn't the taxes. It was their business. Most of them aren't around anymore, having gone bankrupt or been swallowed up by better run businesses.
It sounds like your business has a fundamental problem with its execution. It's immediately apparent from you blaming "underlying costs", and what you really mean is that California doesn't coddle businesses with tax incentives or free money. (See, for example, your rooftop solar complaint, where you really mean the days of easy money for solar installers is going away now that there is a sufficient market that they no longer need government subsidies.)
California has been the world's 4-6th largest economy for several decades. If taxes were as killer as you said they were, it would have flamed out decades ago.
Low tax jurisdictions have low taxes because they need to have low taxes in order to have any chance at competing with properly run economies like CA and NY. Midwestern states don't give out massive government subsidies out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it because the labor force is incompetent and they need to give out massive subsidies to get companies to put up with the huge inefficiencies of a poorly educated workforce that doesn't believe in science.
It looks like your business will learn all this the hard way.
If it was there business that was the case before they left CA. If they leave CA because they think lower taxes alone will help them, they are dead businesses walking. Moving won't help them at all.
> It's immediately apparent from you blaming "underlying costs"
Sure. Sure.
You are focusing on taxes. There's so much more to the issue than just taxes. In fact, I would say lower taxes is just gravy. The structural issues in CA are very serious. If you really want to understand, watch the video I linked. That's just a starting point, BTW.
> for example, your rooftop solar complaint
I guess you don't understand solar either.
Here's a bit of useful advice:
Take your own money. Start a non-trivial business in CA and learn about business reality.
At the same time, take your own money, install a solar system on your home and then learn about the realities of solar as well.
My favorite saying, often attributed to Mark Twain: A man holding a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way.
Most people think they "know", when they really don't. This is seen all the time on HN and other online forums where people love to voice strong opinions on everything, whether they know anything about it or not. It would be funny, except when people have the right to vote on things they truly aren't qualified to understand. It would be like me voting on issues of medical science. Not qualified. At least I am honest enough to understand and admit this.
I clearly know more about running a business than you in the state is California.
If you're truly having this much trouble running your business in CA I suggest reaching out to your local chamber of commerce for support.
My client base of successful California companies exceeded the value of the companies fleeing California by about several hundred billion dollars. Post-COVID, the CA companies are even more valuable than the ones that fled California when they couldn't cut it in a competitive capitalist environment. But yes, you're right that companies that took government handouts from other states to leave CA are surviving off those governments handouts.
However, you're just embarrassing yourself. You've been whining on HN about your company leaving California for a few years now, it's pretty clear that at this point your company has evaluated that option and determined it was actually a stupid thing to do. It's like Elon Musk's "first order thinking": leaving California sounds great on paper until you actually look at the numbers and discover that it doesn't solve anything and actually makes things worse.
It's very rare in LA for someone to build a house in an otherwise undeveloped area of an incorporated part of LA.
So you're basically just arguing against a system that was set up and optimized for the most common case.
We ended up putting the poles in ourselves for 10% the price, so there is hope.
I’m building a house about 15mins outside downtown Los Angeles. It’s on empty land on a public street. There is no power to the property. LADWP is requiring us to move/install 3 poles, and upgrade the transformer. Probably around $75k cost to us. Has to be their people doing the work.
The Bureau of Street Lighting is also going to require us to move another pole that just has their street light on it with low voltage to it.
I’ve been trying so hard to tell them all to get F’d and just install solar and a bunch of batteries instead. But they’ve told me it’s illegal to that (something about freezing to death).
Oh and we have to widen the road ourselves too!
The whole thing is insane. So they’ve basically created a system where we have no choice but to pay for the utilities failing infrastructure.