My counter argument would be that the policies as they currently stand are policies that affect people who have less legal footing in committing change in that

My counter argument would be that the policies as they currently stand are policies that affect people who have less legal footing in committing change in that area. Someone who works in San Francisco as a janitor, but lives in San Jose, doesn't get a vote in San Francisco elections. The people who do get to vote are least affected. So now the local problem as external consequences, which kind of punches a hole in it is entirely a local problem. Depending on how far you want to go with considering something local. EDIT: Another thought. And people the person works in SF, but lives elsewhere, who doesn't get to vote, but still have skin in the game for policy in SF.