> if a state uses federal funds for any community development project, some forcing function will cause them to stop single family zoning. This is specifically

> if a state uses federal funds for any community development project, some forcing function will cause them to stop single family zoning. This is specifically about two types of grants (not all federal funds for community development) and it does not require the elimination of single family zoning. > federal funds going to single family zoning What does it mean for funds to "go to" single family zoning? CDB grants are largely allocated to specific cites and counties already and the portion that is given to states is mostly spent on projects in urban areas[1]. > if a state uses federal funds specifically to fund single family funded communities, they must move toward ending single family zoning. States can continue receiving federal funds as long as they don't spend them on single family zoned communities. The actual proposal is weaker than your proposal since there is no requirement to move towards ending single family zoning. > Disagree it is ironic, disagree it is clear I haven't researched it The conversation has moved from "abolish suburbs" to "a proposal to require certain cites to make a plan to implement policies that reduce barriers to housing development". So either you were being disingenuous originally or hadn't researched the topic. It's also the exact sort of emotionally charged rhetoric you were decrying earlier. [1] https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg/cdbg-expenditure-reports/?&filter_year=&filter_state=&filter_grantee=&current_page=1 https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg/cdbg-expenditure-...