37
submitted 1 month ago by Mex@feddit.uk to c/canterbury@feddit.uk
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 month ago

Then you get all your property seized to make up for it. Simple as that.

[-] Mex@feddit.uk 5 points 1 month ago

I tend to agree, they even still own them

[-] disgrunty@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Fuck these developers.

[-] rayquetzalcoatl@feddit.uk 9 points 1 month ago

oh no, property developers can't afford to bribe the council? oh nooo oh noooo I feel so bad, think about all the predatory landlords that are missing out on somebody else's income oh nooooo

[-] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

I see you didn't read the article. The landlords have gotten their buildings, it's the local community that's getting screwed since those funds were earmarked for local improvements.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

...am I missing something or is this straight up bribery?

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No, the money isn't for the council members it's "to provide facilities to a community following a development in the area." Developments that are needed as a consequence of the new housing.

[-] Mex@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago
[-] blazera@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

The developer promising payment to a council to approve a development.

[-] frazorth@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Not if you dont actually make them.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
37 points (100.0% liked)

Canterbury, Kent

134 readers
7 users here now

A place in the Fediverse for the city of Canterbury, Kent (UK).

We welcome posts relating to:

Rules:

See also:

Image attributions:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS