4 ms·

Good point. Was just talking about PV yesterday and the lengths they've gone to to mitigate. That said I don't think individual property owners are being direct

Good point. Was just talking about PV yesterday and the lengths they've gone to to mitigate. That said I don't think individual property owners are being directly bailed out (i.e., are being made whole on their home values by the government).

renewiltord 1y ago
Did they cancel the buy-out? They effectively picked the highest prices from the last few years if I recall https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/fema-cal-oes-announce-42-million-voluntary-buyout-program-to-rancho-palos-verdes-homeowners-impacted-by-land-movement/ https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/fema-cal-oes-announc...
- harmmonica 1y ago
  Oh man I didn't know! Thanks for pointing me to that. Edit: this is interesting because now that I've read about it it seems the gov is paying fair market value for the land. Do you know if that's for the land value only or are the improvements part of it? Seems like a decent solution actually, but it does beg the larger question: what happens when it's thousands of homes? Have to imagine Palisades and Eaton fire folks are agitating for this exact same deal. The costs, in comparison to PV, will be extreme.
  - renewiltord 1y ago
    I believe it's for the total value as on Dec 1, 2022. The document does not specify that it is for land value alone. The government is paying for the whole property not just the land. It's $42m and homes in that region are $1.5m+ so that's under 50 people. Actual details are here: https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/22752/Voluntary-Property-Buyout---Guidelines-and-Application https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/22752/Voluntary-Pr... Why do you think it's a decent solution? I think these things should be a home insurance concern so that we don't provide de-facto home insurance only for beachside property.
    - harmmonica 1y ago
      Actually commented about this exact thing on HN previously. Would be interested to know where you come out on this, generally speaking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481867

renewiltord 1y ago

Did they cancel the buy-out? They effectively picked the highest prices from the last few years if I recall https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/fema-cal-oes-announce-42-million-voluntary-buyout-program-to-rancho-palos-verdes-homeowners-impacted-by-land-movement/ https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/fema-cal-oes-announc...

harmmonica 1y ago
Oh man I didn't know! Thanks for pointing me to that. Edit: this is interesting because now that I've read about it it seems the gov is paying fair market value for the land. Do you know if that's for the land value only or are the improvements part of it? Seems like a decent solution actually, but it does beg the larger question: what happens when it's thousands of homes? Have to imagine Palisades and Eaton fire folks are agitating for this exact same deal. The costs, in comparison to PV, will be extreme.
- renewiltord 1y ago
  I believe it's for the total value as on Dec 1, 2022. The document does not specify that it is for land value alone. The government is paying for the whole property not just the land. It's $42m and homes in that region are $1.5m+ so that's under 50 people. Actual details are here: https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/22752/Voluntary-Property-Buyout---Guidelines-and-Application https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/22752/Voluntary-Pr... Why do you think it's a decent solution? I think these things should be a home insurance concern so that we don't provide de-facto home insurance only for beachside property.
  - harmmonica 1y ago
    Actually commented about this exact thing on HN previously. Would be interested to know where you come out on this, generally speaking. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41481867