I stand corrected on the sewer, apparently Quadvest is the sewer/wastewater operator as well, though I can't find any plants on google earth.

Yes, but apparently since there are no deed restrictions, they can't actually MAKE the owners connect to the sewer provided.

We have Quadvest in our neighborhood as well (Montgomery county) and our deed restrictions said we have to tie into the main water line in our property. We can still have a well, but the deal was struck when subdivision built, that every house would tie into the water main.

Not sure how Quadvest will get their investment back if landowners are NOT required to tie in.

Some of the complaints said that the water / sewer tap fees were crazy high, but that is a relative term. I think ours are like $500, but they do have to come bring a backhoe out, dig a hole, and add a meter, so that to me isn't crazy high. Company probably barely breaking even at that cost.

schmellba99 said:

---

Old May Banker said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Old May Banker said:

---

This guy selling land to these vagrants doesn't amount to fly **** in the pepper in the grand scheme of how much money is flowing thru there... I'm not sure if it's jealousy, anti-private property rights, or what.... but the take that this guy is wrong while every other business in Texas capitalizes off of their presence seems short sighted.

He didn't let them cross... but just like HEB, McDonald's, Home Depot, etc, he'll take their money.

---

Maybe... but the HEBs/McDonald's of the world don't turn a whole county into a ****hole.

---

No disagreement... so buy his property, change the county restrictions, etc... but private property rights are absolutely paramount IMHO... even if I disagree with their outcome.

---

Odds are he has control over enough of the county that this isn't happening.

Private property rights are paramount....but they do have limitations, and everybody agrees on that whether you want to admit it or not.

---

I've already admitted as much and largely agree... but there's also a faction that would, given the chance, dictate the use of high fencing, put solar panels or wind mills all over creation, seize land for eminent domain projects, etc... as much as I detest what he's done, I defend his rights to do it as I do not like the alternative - giving governmental agencies more rights over private properties.

While everyone widely agrees this place is a **** hole, there are some that believe $350k tract homes are as well... I'm not a fan of those arbitrary decisions being made by public sentiment and government over reach on private property owners.

Which sucks, because I generally agree about the nature of this "development"

So helpful. Thank you.

If this were a border county, it would be called a colonia. This stuff has been going on for decades. People around Houston are just now being outraged because they found out it is happening in their backyard.

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Listening to this now...

Guy is basically a legal slum lord on 55 square miles.

Bought cheap property, selling the land at 12% interest rate, with 40K residence today, 100K residence by 2035, and 200K residences by 2040s.

This will be an anchor on Liberty county for 100 years.

Apparently, there are no restrictions in the neighborhood at all, so nothing to keep this from being slums.
He says if he did it again, he would still no put restrictions at all.

He basically doesn't give a damn about any existing neighbors.

500 Million in Land Sales Annually @ 12% Interest PER YEAR = $60 Million per Year in Interest Payments Alone

---

The Liberty County Sheriff's office estimates that there are between 75-100k people there currently.

And to give people an idea how close this place is, the southern end of it is almost up against the new portion of the Grand Parkway.

---

Average amount of wastewater per day per person is around 60 gallons, give or take. But 60 is a good number for estimating.

40k people * 60 gallons per person per day = 2.4 MGD
75k people * 60 gallons per person per day = 4.5 MGD
100k people * 60 gallons per person per day = 6.0 MGD

I just got done building a 6.0 MGD wastewater plant for the city of Conroe - this was pre-covid bid so the city got lucky as hell, but it was still a $60 million project and our jobsite was about 125 acres.

Today a 6 MGD plant runs about $140 million, takes years to get permitting for - and there isn't anything approachng a wastewater treatment facility, much less one that can handle 2.4 MGD average flow, in or around these "developments".

Burdizzo said:

---

If this were a border county, it would be called a colonia. This stuff has been going on for decades. People around Houston are just now being outraged because they found out it is happening in their backyard.

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Listening to this now...

Guy is basically a legal slum lord on 55 square miles.

Bought cheap property, selling the land at 12% interest rate, with 40K residence today, 100K residence by 2035, and 200K residences by 2040s.

This will be an anchor on Liberty county for 100 years.

Apparently, there are no restrictions in the neighborhood at all, so nothing to keep this from being slums.
He says if he did it again, he would still no put restrictions at all.

He basically doesn't give a damn about any existing neighbors.

500 Million in Land Sales Annually @ 12% Interest PER YEAR = $60 Million per Year in Interest Payments Alone

---

The Liberty County Sheriff's office estimates that there are between 75-100k people there currently.

And to give people an idea how close this place is, the southern end of it is almost up against the new portion of the Grand Parkway.

---

The San Jacinto County sheriff is on record saying there are at least four cartels within the colonia and named which cartels. Lots of drugs and safe houses as well.

one safe place said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Listening to this now...

Guy is basically a legal slum lord on 55 square miles.

Bought cheap property, selling the land at 12% interest rate, with 40K residence today, 100K residence by 2035, and 200K residences by 2040s.

This will be an anchor on Liberty county for 100 years.

Apparently, there are no restrictions in the neighborhood at all, so nothing to keep this from being slums.
He says if he did it again, he would still no put restrictions at all.

He basically doesn't give a damn about any existing neighbors.

500 Million in Land Sales Annually @ 12% Interest PER YEAR = $60 Million per Year in Interest Payments Alone

---

The Liberty County Sheriff's office estimates that there are between 75-100k people there currently.

And to give people an idea how close this place is, the southern end of it is almost up against the new portion of the Grand Parkway.

---

The San Jacinto County sheriff is on record saying there are at least four cartels within the colonia and named which cartels. Lots of drugs and safe houses as well.

---

Better there than your neighbor next door in Cinco Ranch (just an example, no idea where you live of course).

But cartels in suburbia are nothing new.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/mexican-cartel-figure-pleads-guilty-in-2013-southlake-town-square-murder/3004703/

Burdizzo said:

---

If this were a border county, it would be called a colonia. This stuff has been going on for decades. People around Houston are just now being outraged because they found out it is happening in their backyard.

---

It is called a colonia

The problem is that places like this are ultimately what leads to more government and more restrictions, it's inevitable.

one safe place said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Listening to this now...

Guy is basically a legal slum lord on 55 square miles.

Bought cheap property, selling the land at 12% interest rate, with 40K residence today, 100K residence by 2035, and 200K residences by 2040s.

This will be an anchor on Liberty county for 100 years.

Apparently, there are no restrictions in the neighborhood at all, so nothing to keep this from being slums.
He says if he did it again, he would still no put restrictions at all.

He basically doesn't give a damn about any existing neighbors.

500 Million in Land Sales Annually @ 12% Interest PER YEAR = $60 Million per Year in Interest Payments Alone

---

The Liberty County Sheriff's office estimates that there are between 75-100k people there currently.

And to give people an idea how close this place is, the southern end of it is almost up against the new portion of the Grand Parkway.

---

The San Jacinto County sheriff is on record saying there are at least four cartels within the colonia and named which cartels. Lots of drugs and safe houses as well.

---

Also 12 kids from Cleveland high have died from fentanyl overdose since the start of the school year (pretty sure that's what was said yesterday on the radio)

Quote:

---

Also 12 kids from Cleveland high have died from fentanyl overdose since the start of the school year (pretty sure that's what was said yesterday on the radio)

---

I searched for news stories on this and no deaths have been reported. There have been 15 incidents of drug activity on campus. 8 of those were overdoses.

Interestingly, Michael Berry mentioned that there had been 15 overdoses to Trey and Trey says he's sad and concerned that there had been 15 deaths.

15 deaths in 2 months of school? That would be more than 2/week.

Old May Banker said:

---

a landowner taking advantage of a piss poor immigration policy has nothing to do with the creation of that policy.

Should Home Depot also not sell to them?

---

HEB would be a better example IMO than HomeDepot because at least HD doesn't take Lonestar cards. That said, which party ultimately benefits more from open borders, it definitely ain't a red wave rolling over our southern border.

I agree.

With a check or cash just like any other landowner. The rub for Cleveland ISD is the majority of these landowners can't vote in bond elections so the OG Cleveland ISD residents keep voting down bonds for school construction. I think there is one upcoming fore125 million, with a zero tax increase. Smart money says it won't pass.

Colony Ridge is a supersized version of what happened to most of the farmland between Dayton and Huffman. The west side got Cinco Ranch, Jordan Ranch, etc and the east side with all the cheap land got the colonias.

schmellba99 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

If this were a border county, it would be called a colonia. This stuff has been going on for decades. People around Houston are just now being outraged because they found out it is happening in their backyard.

---

It is called a colonia

---

Of course it is. I am not taking any satisfaction in pointing out that 2-1/2 pages into this discussion I am the first person to use the word. It was a topic on a radio show here one San Antonio a couple of weeks ago, and no one then used that word either. I am unclear why there is an aversion to calling it what it is . It is a colonia, and South Texas already has scores of them

no one has quoted Ray Wylie Hubbard yet?

Uncle Slayton's got his Texan pride
Back in the thickets with his Asian bride
He's cut that corner pasture into acre lots'
He sells 'em owner financed
Strictly to them that's got no kind of credit 'Cause he knows they're slackers
When they miss that payment
Then he takes it back
He plays that Choctaw Bingo every Friday night

fka ftc said:

---

one safe place said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

Listening to this now...

Guy is basically a legal slum lord on 55 square miles.

Bought cheap property, selling the land at 12% interest rate, with 40K residence today, 100K residence by 2035, and 200K residences by 2040s.

This will be an anchor on Liberty county for 100 years.

Apparently, there are no restrictions in the neighborhood at all, so nothing to keep this from being slums.
He says if he did it again, he would still no put restrictions at all.

He basically doesn't give a damn about any existing neighbors.

500 Million in Land Sales Annually @ 12% Interest PER YEAR = $60 Million per Year in Interest Payments Alone

---

The Liberty County Sheriff's office estimates that there are between 75-100k people there currently.

And to give people an idea how close this place is, the southern end of it is almost up against the new portion of the Grand Parkway.

---

The San Jacinto County sheriff is on record saying there are at least four cartels within the colonia and named which cartels. Lots of drugs and safe houses as well.

---

Better there than your neighbor next door in Cinco Ranch (just an example, no idea where you live of course).

But cartels in suburbia are nothing new.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/mexican-cartel-figure-pleads-guilty-in-2013-southlake-town-square-murder/3004703/

---

Better nowhere.

Nobody thinks cartels can't be found in a lot of places.

Different class of people in Cinco Ranch than Colony Ridge. Different quality of homes and infrastructure. And cartel per square mile, illegals per square mile, sewer draining to ditches or under homes per square mile, etc. will be higher in Colony Ridge than in places like Cinco Ranch and similar. Would be even a higher number if those in law enforcement were doing their job.

Gator92 said:

---

Quote:

---

Also 12 kids from Cleveland high have died from fentanyl overdose since the start of the school year (pretty sure that's what was said yesterday on the radio)

---

I searched for news stories on this and no deaths have been reported. There have been 15 incidents of drug activity on campus. 8 of those were overdoses.

Interestingly, Michael Berry mentioned that there had been 15 overdoses to Trey and Trey says he's sad and concerned that there had been 15 deaths.

15 deaths in 2 months of school? That would be more than 2/week.

---

The fentanyl overdoses in the high school were not deaths. They have Narcan in every high school and middle school classroom reportedly in Cleveland isd.

There have been multiple murders in the subdivision recently, including a couple of teenage boys found in a car by their community mailboxes. Somehow the unsolved recent murders of teenagers were not mentioned on the Michael Berry show yesterday.

rednecked said:

---

no one has quoted Ray Wylie Hubbard yet?

Uncle Slayton's got his Texan pride
Back in the thickets with his Asian bride
He's cut that corner pasture into acre lots'
He sells 'em owner financed
Strictly to them that's got no kind of credit 'Cause he knows they're slackers
When they miss that payment
Then he takes it back
He plays that Choctaw Bingo every Friday night

---

James McMurtry

aggiez03 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

Doesn't have to be illegal to be wrong.

---

If you find yourself arguing for less liberty, then you are probably wrong.

Thomas Sowell had a chapter/essay regarding "slum lords" in NY during the industrial revolution. Basically the story was that some do-good reporter did an expose on slum lords reporting that tenants were living 6-8 to a room with only one bathroom per floor. People were shocked and the local government reacted by passing a law that required "basic standards" like a bathroom, only a few people per room, and crap like that.

Some of them refused to comply out of principle. So when the police were dispatched to shut these places down, the landlords were armed and ready to defend their property against tyranny. In addition, the TENANTS WERE ARMED RIGHT ALONG SIDE OF THEIR LANDLORDS. You see the tenants desperately NEEDED to live in a place with damn low rent. In many cases, they were fathers of foreign families who immigrated here alone. They were working to save up money to bring the rest of their family over. They didn't care about a bathroom in their room, they wanted to earn as much as possible to bring their families over ASAP. So when the government shut their landlords down, THEY got screwed more than anybody. In many cases they could no longer afford to live here, and so they spent their saved money going back to their home country since they didn't want to wait 15 years to bring their families over.

The lesson to learn out of this, is that liberalism always screws people over. No matter how good it sounds.

---

That may be all well and good for the desperate tenants and the landlords looking to make a buck off them, but that kind of stuff comes with consequences for the surrounding community when it comes to things like health and sanitation that modern cities are built on. That kind of setup is perfect breeding outbreaks of disease that spill over to other surrounding areas. Think having a house with high grass and junk all over the yard being a breeding grind for mosquitoes, rats, snakes, mice, and other pests that spill over to neighbors. No one lives in a vacuum, and your neighbors absolutely have a say on what you can and can't do when it's going to impact them.

---

Your statement of "landlords looking to make a buck off them.." shows that you have fallen for liberal propaganda. Both sides are providing a service to each other. If there weren't landlords willing to rent to desperate tenants, then those desperate tenants would be screwed and far more desperate. Such landlords are HELPING their fellow man, not screwing them over. The people who are screwing them over are nanny government types who forbid such trades from taking place in the first place. The idea that these landlords should give away their housing for a loss so that 3rd party nanny types can virtue signal is simple minded.

And if you want to live in a place that forces cut grass, then find a neighborhood with a pre-established HOA. Don't force it at a city or state level. Let people decide the pros and cons of their decisions for themselves. If I want to risk living near somebody with "rats, snakes, and mice" in exchange for no-HOA then I should be able to chose that. If you don't, then fine.

---

Sounds great until that neighborhood is built in your backyard. Imagine having family land that you retire to and live on your last 30 years of your life only to find out that this development is backing up to your property and their dogs are running on your property, there sh*t is running on to your property.

No one says it is illegal. Creating slums is just a sh*tty thing to do..

I think you would think differently if it were happening to you personally.

---

So it's better for there to be tent cities in somebody else's back yard, than an apartment complex in yours? How selfish of you. Talk about a sh*tty thing to do. If there was karma, those tent cities would be in your back yard.

It's THEIR LAND. Not yours. Other property owners have the right to enjoy their property the same as you. You aren't special. It's an a-hole move to use the threat of (government) violence to keep them from doing what they want with their own land.

And have you ever heard of calling animal control?

Yesterday said:

---

Are there more honest professions out there?!

---

Lawyers on this thread

&ct=g

schmellba99 said:

---

But what happens if you are already there and people move in that have no problem living with rats, crapping in their yard, etc. right next door?

It's a double edged sword, for sure....but the fact of the matter is that you impact your neighbors, and they impact you.

---

If you are concerned about that, then you should have chosen a neighborhood with an HOA that disallows that sort of thing. I've lived in both neighborhoods with and without an HOA. And I'll take the latter 8 days a week if I could. But with a localized system, you can do you and live with like-minded people and everybody can be happy.

wonder if Trey visits Colony Ridge anymore

collects the monthly mortgage or loan payment himself

He's beyond that and has associates that handle the dirty work.

For sure. The subdivision is expanding to the East and Northeast supposedly. There is Tarkington bayou on the current East boundary but I understand they own land East of the bayou and plan to expand that direction, which will be in the Tarkington school district. So it will connect out to Highway 321. Plenty of undeveloped timber land in that direction.

aTmAg said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

Doesn't have to be illegal to be wrong.

---

If you find yourself arguing for less liberty, then you are probably wrong.

Thomas Sowell had a chapter/essay regarding "slum lords" in NY during the industrial revolution. Basically the story was that some do-good reporter did an expose on slum lords reporting that tenants were living 6-8 to a room with only one bathroom per floor. People were shocked and the local government reacted by passing a law that required "basic standards" like a bathroom, only a few people per room, and crap like that.

Some of them refused to comply out of principle. So when the police were dispatched to shut these places down, the landlords were armed and ready to defend their property against tyranny. In addition, the TENANTS WERE ARMED RIGHT ALONG SIDE OF THEIR LANDLORDS. You see the tenants desperately NEEDED to live in a place with damn low rent. In many cases, they were fathers of foreign families who immigrated here alone. They were working to save up money to bring the rest of their family over. They didn't care about a bathroom in their room, they wanted to earn as much as possible to bring their families over ASAP. So when the government shut their landlords down, THEY got screwed more than anybody. In many cases they could no longer afford to live here, and so they spent their saved money going back to their home country since they didn't want to wait 15 years to bring their families over.

The lesson to learn out of this, is that liberalism always screws people over. No matter how good it sounds.

---

That may be all well and good for the desperate tenants and the landlords looking to make a buck off them, but that kind of stuff comes with consequences for the surrounding community when it comes to things like health and sanitation that modern cities are built on. That kind of setup is perfect breeding outbreaks of disease that spill over to other surrounding areas. Think having a house with high grass and junk all over the yard being a breeding grind for mosquitoes, rats, snakes, mice, and other pests that spill over to neighbors. No one lives in a vacuum, and your neighbors absolutely have a say on what you can and can't do when it's going to impact them.

---

Your statement of "landlords looking to make a buck off them.." shows that you have fallen for liberal propaganda. Both sides are providing a service to each other. If there weren't landlords willing to rent to desperate tenants, then those desperate tenants would be screwed and far more desperate. Such landlords are HELPING their fellow man, not screwing them over. The people who are screwing them over are nanny government types who forbid such trades from taking place in the first place. The idea that these landlords should give away their housing for a loss so that 3rd party nanny types can virtue signal is simple minded.

And if you want to live in a place that forces cut grass, then find a neighborhood with a pre-established HOA. Don't force it at a city or state level. Let people decide the pros and cons of their decisions for themselves. If I want to risk living near somebody with "rats, snakes, and mice" in exchange for no-HOA then I should be able to chose that. If you don't, then fine.

---

I'll sum up your response: "Here, let me ignore the point and spew rhetoric."

Your choices don't happen in a vacuum. When they affect other people, those people certainly have a right to have a say in what choices you can make.

Let's say I move in next to you and turn my lot into a superfund site with junk cars and waist high weeds. I leave the house vacant and let all manner of pests run rampant. You don't like it and want to move, but because of the eyesore next door, the only offers you get are 60% of your home's value and less than you owe. You didn't choose to live next to a ****hole, but you're still stuck with all the consequences of my actions.

Now, you could say if you don't want to take that risk, then go live in an HOA. You mean go live somewhere that elects its leadership to establish rules governing acceptable behavior and standards within its jurisdiction? Kind of like every form of municipality? Cities and municipalities have all the rules they do because the citizens (members) who live there have collectively decided that those are the rules they wish to abide by, and if you don't like it, you are free to not live there. Just like an HOA.

aTmAg said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

Doesn't have to be illegal to be wrong.

---

If you find yourself arguing for less liberty, then you are probably wrong.

Thomas Sowell had a chapter/essay regarding "slum lords" in NY during the industrial revolution. Basically the story was that some do-good reporter did an expose on slum lords reporting that tenants were living 6-8 to a room with only one bathroom per floor. People were shocked and the local government reacted by passing a law that required "basic standards" like a bathroom, only a few people per room, and crap like that.

Some of them refused to comply out of principle. So when the police were dispatched to shut these places down, the landlords were armed and ready to defend their property against tyranny. In addition, the TENANTS WERE ARMED RIGHT ALONG SIDE OF THEIR LANDLORDS. You see the tenants desperately NEEDED to live in a place with damn low rent. In many cases, they were fathers of foreign families who immigrated here alone. They were working to save up money to bring the rest of their family over. They didn't care about a bathroom in their room, they wanted to earn as much as possible to bring their families over ASAP. So when the government shut their landlords down, THEY got screwed more than anybody. In many cases they could no longer afford to live here, and so they spent their saved money going back to their home country since they didn't want to wait 15 years to bring their families over.

The lesson to learn out of this, is that liberalism always screws people over. No matter how good it sounds.

---

That may be all well and good for the desperate tenants and the landlords looking to make a buck off them, but that kind of stuff comes with consequences for the surrounding community when it comes to things like health and sanitation that modern cities are built on. That kind of setup is perfect breeding outbreaks of disease that spill over to other surrounding areas. Think having a house with high grass and junk all over the yard being a breeding grind for mosquitoes, rats, snakes, mice, and other pests that spill over to neighbors. No one lives in a vacuum, and your neighbors absolutely have a say on what you can and can't do when it's going to impact them.

---

Your statement of "landlords looking to make a buck off them.." shows that you have fallen for liberal propaganda. Both sides are providing a service to each other. If there weren't landlords willing to rent to desperate tenants, then those desperate tenants would be screwed and far more desperate. Such landlords are HELPING their fellow man, not screwing them over. The people who are screwing them over are nanny government types who forbid such trades from taking place in the first place. The idea that these landlords should give away their housing for a loss so that 3rd party nanny types can virtue signal is simple minded.

And if you want to live in a place that forces cut grass, then find a neighborhood with a pre-established HOA. Don't force it at a city or state level. Let people decide the pros and cons of their decisions for themselves. If I want to risk living near somebody with "rats, snakes, and mice" in exchange for no-HOA then I should be able to chose that. If you don't, then fine.

---

Sounds great until that neighborhood is built in your backyard. Imagine having family land that you retire to and live on your last 30 years of your life only to find out that this development is backing up to your property and their dogs are running on your property, there sh*t is running on to your property.

No one says it is illegal. Creating slums is just a sh*tty thing to do..

I think you would think differently if it were happening to you personally.

---

So it's better for there to be tent cities in somebody else's back yard, than an apartment complex in yours? How selfish of you. Talk about a sh*tty thing to do. If there was karma, those tent cities would be in your back yard.

It's THEIR LAND. Not yours. Other property owners have the right to enjoy their property the same as you. You aren't special. It's an a-hole move to use the threat of (government) violence to keep them from doing what they want with their own land.

And have you ever heard of calling animal control?

---

County doesn't have animal control. THEIR LAND or not (and it isn't until they pay it off) there are rules and regulations that are supposed to be followed. For some reason, Colony Ridge seems to get by without doing so.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

Doesn't have to be illegal to be wrong.

---

If you find yourself arguing for less liberty, then you are probably wrong.

Thomas Sowell had a chapter/essay regarding "slum lords" in NY during the industrial revolution. Basically the story was that some do-good reporter did an expose on slum lords reporting that tenants were living 6-8 to a room with only one bathroom per floor. People were shocked and the local government reacted by passing a law that required "basic standards" like a bathroom, only a few people per room, and crap like that.

Some of them refused to comply out of principle. So when the police were dispatched to shut these places down, the landlords were armed and ready to defend their property against tyranny. In addition, the TENANTS WERE ARMED RIGHT ALONG SIDE OF THEIR LANDLORDS. You see the tenants desperately NEEDED to live in a place with damn low rent. In many cases, they were fathers of foreign families who immigrated here alone. They were working to save up money to bring the rest of their family over. They didn't care about a bathroom in their room, they wanted to earn as much as possible to bring their families over ASAP. So when the government shut their landlords down, THEY got screwed more than anybody. In many cases they could no longer afford to live here, and so they spent their saved money going back to their home country since they didn't want to wait 15 years to bring their families over.

The lesson to learn out of this, is that liberalism always screws people over. No matter how good it sounds.

---

That may be all well and good for the desperate tenants and the landlords looking to make a buck off them, but that kind of stuff comes with consequences for the surrounding community when it comes to things like health and sanitation that modern cities are built on. That kind of setup is perfect breeding outbreaks of disease that spill over to other surrounding areas. Think having a house with high grass and junk all over the yard being a breeding grind for mosquitoes, rats, snakes, mice, and other pests that spill over to neighbors. No one lives in a vacuum, and your neighbors absolutely have a say on what you can and can't do when it's going to impact them.

---

Your statement of "landlords looking to make a buck off them.." shows that you have fallen for liberal propaganda. Both sides are providing a service to each other. If there weren't landlords willing to rent to desperate tenants, then those desperate tenants would be screwed and far more desperate. Such landlords are HELPING their fellow man, not screwing them over. The people who are screwing them over are nanny government types who forbid such trades from taking place in the first place. The idea that these landlords should give away their housing for a loss so that 3rd party nanny types can virtue signal is simple minded.

And if you want to live in a place that forces cut grass, then find a neighborhood with a pre-established HOA. Don't force it at a city or state level. Let people decide the pros and cons of their decisions for themselves. If I want to risk living near somebody with "rats, snakes, and mice" in exchange for no-HOA then I should be able to chose that. If you don't, then fine.

---

I'll sum up your response: "Here, let me ignore the point and spew rhetoric."

Your choices don't happen in a vacuum. When they affect other people, those people certainly have a right to have a say in what choices you can make.

Let's say I move in next to you and turn my lot into a superfund site with junk cars and waist high weeds. I leave the house vacant and let all manner of pests run rampant. You don't like it and want to move, but because of the eyesore next door, the only offers you get are 60% of your home's value and less than you owe. You didn't choose to live next to a ****hole, but you're still stuck with all the consequences of my actions.

Now, you could say if you don't want to take that risk, then go live in an HOA. You mean go live somewhere that elects its leadership to establish rules governing acceptable behavior and standards within its jurisdiction? Kind of like every form of municipality? Cities and municipalities have all the rules they do because the citizens (members) who live there have collectively decided that those are the rules they wish to abide by, and if you don't like it, you are free to not live there. Just like an HOA.

---

Why not make them UN resolutions then? Better yet, let's make it universal so that when we someday colonize mars and other solar systems, your rules apply there too?

Answer: because it's STUPID

Non-excludable services are only non-excludable at a given scope. National defense is non-excludable at a country level. Meaning, we can easily exclude our defense services to Mexican citizens if they get invaded by central america, but it's much harder to exclude individual neighborhoods. That is why defense is a nation level service and not a local one.

Whether or not somebody cuts their yard nice enough for your taste is as local as it gets. A person with junk cars in his yard living 1 mile away from me has ZERO effect on me. So it's idiotic to have a set of rules at a scale that applies to us both. If we do it at the neighborhood level, than all the people who like living like him can go live near him, and the people who like to cut their lawn weekly like me can live next to me, and everybody is happy. That's the way it's supposed to work.

one safe place said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

aggiez03 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

TxSquarebody said:

---

Doesn't have to be illegal to be wrong.

---

If you find yourself arguing for less liberty, then you are probably wrong.

Thomas Sowell had a chapter/essay regarding "slum lords" in NY during the industrial revolution. Basically the story was that some do-good reporter did an expose on slum lords reporting that tenants were living 6-8 to a room with only one bathroom per floor. People were shocked and the local government reacted by passing a law that required "basic standards" like a bathroom, only a few people per room, and crap like that.

Some of them refused to comply out of principle. So when the police were dispatched to shut these places down, the landlords were armed and ready to defend their property against tyranny. In addition, the TENANTS WERE ARMED RIGHT ALONG SIDE OF THEIR LANDLORDS. You see the tenants desperately NEEDED to live in a place with damn low rent. In many cases, they were fathers of foreign families who immigrated here alone. They were working to save up money to bring the rest of their family over. They didn't care about a bathroom in their room, they wanted to earn as much as possible to bring their families over ASAP. So when the government shut their landlords down, THEY got screwed more than anybody. In many cases they could no longer afford to live here, and so they spent their saved money going back to their home country since they didn't want to wait 15 years to bring their families over.

The lesson to learn out of this, is that liberalism always screws people over. No matter how good it sounds.

---

That may be all well and good for the desperate tenants and the landlords looking to make a buck off them, but that kind of stuff comes with consequences for the surrounding community when it comes to things like health and sanitation that modern cities are built on. That kind of setup is perfect breeding outbreaks of disease that spill over to other surrounding areas. Think having a house with high grass and junk all over the yard being a breeding grind for mosquitoes, rats, snakes, mice, and other pests that spill over to neighbors. No one lives in a vacuum, and your neighbors absolutely have a say on what you can and can't do when it's going to impact them.

---

Your statement of "landlords looking to make a buck off them.." shows that you have fallen for liberal propaganda. Both sides are providing a service to each other. If there weren't landlords willing to rent to desperate tenants, then those desperate tenants would be screwed and far more desperate. Such landlords are HELPING their fellow man, not screwing them over. The people who are screwing them over are nanny government types who forbid such trades from taking place in the first place. The idea that these landlords should give away their housing for a loss so that 3rd party nanny types can virtue signal is simple minded.

And if you want to live in a place that forces cut grass, then find a neighborhood with a pre-established HOA. Don't force it at a city or state level. Let people decide the pros and cons of their decisions for themselves. If I want to risk living near somebody with "rats, snakes, and mice" in exchange for no-HOA then I should be able to chose that. If you don't, then fine.

---

Sounds great until that neighborhood is built in your backyard. Imagine having family land that you retire to and live on your last 30 years of your life only to find out that this development is backing up to your property and their dogs are running on your property, there sh*t is running on to your property.

No one says it is illegal. Creating slums is just a sh*tty thing to do..

I think you would think differently if it were happening to you personally.

---

So it's better for there to be tent cities in somebody else's back yard, than an apartment complex in yours? How selfish of you. Talk about a sh*tty thing to do. If there was karma, those tent cities would be in your back yard.

It's THEIR LAND. Not yours. Other property owners have the right to enjoy their property the same as you. You aren't special. It's an a-hole move to use the threat of (government) violence to keep them from doing what they want with their own land.

And have you ever heard of calling animal control?

---

County doesn't have animal control. THEIR LAND or not (and it isn't until they pay it off) there are rules and regulations that are supposed to be followed. For some reason, Colony Ridge seems to get by without doing so.

---

My point is that we have gone so overboard on the rules and regulations that we screw ourselves. It's why we have so many tent cities now. The more expensive the housing we impose, the worse the tent city problem. That's a big reason why San Francisco has a worse problem than College Station. Making a law that requires every domicile to have a yard would likely force 1/3rd of our population to live in tent cities. Your regulations don't fix problems, they just trade them for other (almost always worse) ones.

Developer built brand new roads and infrastructure. The tenants turned it into a slum. They can make a lot of money off the poor, but the poor gonna not going to change their poor habits.

Our latest investigation into Colony Ridge, the controversial Texas development that has become a magnet for illegal immigrants, found that the developers have used a powerful local government board to award more than $16 million in taxpayer funds to a private paving company with…

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) December 14, 2023

The ex-mayor that Michael Berry interviewed for about an hour mentioned Tim Green of Coats Rose was the attorney helping the developer with development legal issues. Tim Green is an above board development and public law attorney. If he's involved the development and its various financing entities are being done legally, despite what the headlines suggest.

Feds in da house...

Quote:

---

"Today's complaint alleges that Colony Ridge targeted Hispanic consumers with predatory loans, misled borrowers about the water, sewer and electrical infrastructure on its lots, and exploited language barriers by conducting most of its marketing in Spanish while offering important transaction documents only in English," Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said. "Discrimination in lending harms families and neighborhoods for generations; it is wrong and has no place in our country."

---

https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/federal-lawsuit-colony-ridge-texas/285-8b621dcd-d6ac-496c-9d15-86d384f60d3f