Latest news with #Lieu
Yahoo
23-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Controversial Boston-Edison apartments plan gets Detroit appeals board support
A resident of Detroit's Boston-Edison neighborhood fell short on July 21 in his effort to halt a developer's controversial plan to transform a vacant building into 49 income-restricted apartments, despite support from other nearby residents also in opposition. Members of the Board of Zoning Appeals voted 7 to 2 to reject the resident's request to overturn an April decision by the city's Buildings, Safety Engineering, and Environmental Department, or BSEED, which gave a green light to the redevelopment project at 9851 Hamilton. The vote capped a marathon July 21 hearing on the redevelopment proposal that ran for nearly five hours. Although the empty three-story building is not within the Boston-Edison Historic District, it is directly adjacent to it. More: Controversy erupts over apartments plan near Detroit's Boston-Edison neighborhood Many who spoke against the project at the hearing were Boston-Edison homeowners, including the resident behind the formal appeal, Kegan Scannell, who lives in a house next door to the Hamilton property. It was not immediately clear whether Scannell intends to appeal the BZA's decision by taking it to the Wayne County Circuit Court. His successful 2023 appeal of the project's earlier city approvals forced the developer to restart the process from the beginning this year. The developer, Timeless Properties, seeks to convert the 1920 building that was once a church's community center into apartments and ground-floor retail space, including a possible cafe. This spring's BSEED approval would allow for housing and retail at the site, where the current permitted uses are office and parking. Timeless Properties says it is looking to enroll the development in a new city PILOT program, or Payment In Lieu of Taxes, aimed at creating "workforce housing" and in which rents would be capped, with residents allowed to earn no more than 120% of the area median income, currently $84,840 for an individual or $96,960 for two people. Numerous Boston-Edison residents have spoken out against the project at hearings, voicing general concerns that the new apartments and retail would introduce too much density to the neighborhood, generate too much traffic and hog street parking. While BZA members heard a mix of comments during the hearing from the project's supporters and opponents, most of the comments and written letter submissions were in opposition. Scannell stood before the appeals board with his attorney, Charlotte McCray, who also is a Boston-Edison resident. McCray offered a list of the project's potential negative impacts to Scannell: Diminishment of his property values. Having his property mere feet away from the apartment building's dumpster. The possibility of the dumpster attracting rats. A reduction in privacy, with some of the building's windows directly facing his house's windows. The current lack of screening, such as a wall, between the building and his property. His expected loss of enjoyment from his property if the development proceeds. Scannell told the BZA members that he definitely believes the development will negatively affect the value of his property. 'I wouldn't have bought the house if I knew there was going to be 49 apartments behind it," he said. Scannell also said that his dogs as well as one of his neighbors suffered respiratory problems after one of the project's contractors — who was later fired — was caught dumping debris out of the building's windows. Later in the hearing, Scannell accused the city of having "developer favoritism" when granting approvals for this project and others throughout Detroit, and of minimizing concerns from neighboring residents like himself. 'This process has been immensely difficult for me personally," he said, "but I love my neighborhood and want to protect it. 'Rather than holding the applicant to the standards of the zoning ordinance, the city has bent over backwards to justify a noncompliant project while disregarding the lived experiences of the residents most directly affected.' Among the Boston-Edison residents who spoke against the project July 21 was Alan Brown, who owns the Motown Mansion once belonging to Berry Gordy and which is located on the opposite side of Hamilton from the proposed apartments. Brown said he disputes BSEED's contention that the development wouldn't change the character of the immediate neighborhood. "What I am witnessing today is the systematic bias of the city of Detroit in favor of this developer," Brown said, "and frankly, I think it's shocking.' Timeless Properties' co-owner Adam Noel defended the redevelopment during the hearing and questioned whether Scannell truly fits the legal definition of having been "aggrieved" by the BSEED decision. He noted how much of the debate during the hearing centered on parking, even though Scannell's house has a garage and a sizable driveway that could accommodate many vehicles. "This building existed 100 years before the applicant (Scannell) bought his home," Noel said. He also emphasized that Timeless Properties' aim is to restore and bring an empty building back to life. 'This is not a new development taking away a field next to a community, or tearing down existing structures that (don't) fit the neighborhood or its surroundings," Noel said. 'Rather, this building is a time capsule to what Detroit used to be 100 years ago and a testament to the architecture of the early 20th century," he said. "By renovating this building, we are removing blight from the neighborhood, eliminating a potential fire hazard and enhancing the livability of the community.' Contact JC Reindl: 313-378-5460 or jcreindl@ Follow him on X @jcreindl This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Controversial Boston-Edison apartments plan gets appeals board support
Politico
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Politico
A new push for AI rules from Washington
TECH MAZE California Rep. Ted Lieu thinks regulating artificial intelligence is an area where Republicans and Democrats like him can work together. 'I hope that we're going to be able to pass some AI legislation this term,' said Lieu, who with California Republican Rep. Jay Obernolte co-chaired the House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence last Congress, at The Hill's Nation Summit in Washington on Wednesday. State of play: The task force issued a report last year with more than 80 recommendations that focused on 'demonstrable' harms of AI but took a conservative approach to passing new laws. During the report's development, many health care groups, including those representing doctors, medical device makers, technology developers, hospitals, health systems and insurers, told POLITICO they wanted the federal government to regulate AI — albeit with a light touch. Although the task force hasn't been renewed this Congress, Lieu is hopeful lawmakers can still make progress: 'A number of those recommendations can easily become legislation,' he said. When asked whether they could get the White House on board, Lieu pointed to Trump allies' failed effort to freeze AI enforcement in the states and suggested they might not have a choice. 'What we're facing now is not whether AI is going to have laws and regulations put on it,' Lieu said. 'It's do you want Congress to do it, or do you want 27 states to do it?' What's next: Lieu said the United States must move forward with building AI data centers, despite environmental groups' concerns about the amount of energy and water they use. If we don't, he warned, the U.S. won't stay competitive globally. But the U.S. should still build thoughtfully, he added, and focus on expanding renewable energy to meet the country's rising needs. 'It's not really a smart approach to say, 'Don't build these things because of energy,'' Lieu said, adding, 'Then they're going to be built in another country. I'd rather have them built in America.' WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care. A scholar of meditation at Harvard is warning that, while mostly positive, meditation can lead to suffering in some. He's calling for more research to better understand why that's the case. Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Danny Nguyen at dnguyen@ Carmen Paun at cpaun@ Ruth Reader at rreader@ or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@ Want to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: Dannyn516.70, CarmenP.82, RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01. WORLD VIEW Global health funding has dropped this year to 2009 levels, threatening decades of progress against infectious diseases globally, the Seattle-based Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation warns in a new report. How so: IHME estimates that cuts in U.S. health funding for low-income countries this year, coupled with reductions from other major donor countries such as the U.K., will put total foreign-aid funding for health at $38.4 billion, where it was in 2009. This represents a sharp decline from 2021, when global health funding reached $80.3 billion during the Covid-19 pandemic. IHME estimates the U.S. government reduced its global health funding by 67 percent this year, which accounts for more than $9 billion. The institute's preliminary estimates suggest that the Gates Foundation has, for the first time, surpassed the U.S. government as the largest source of funding for development assistance for health. But the total global health funding is expected to continue declining and is estimated to reach $36.2 billion in 2030, according to the IHME report. Why it matters: This funding drop could have profound consequences, IHME warns. 'It is likely that people are losing access to lifesaving health care services,' the report notes. Mitigating the impact of the funding cuts hinges on beneficiary countries' ability to mobilize their own domestic resources. But that varies widely, which will see some countries facing cuts in health services or needing to improve their health system's efficiency. One such example is Zambia, which is digitizing its health system to serve more people and improve their access to medicines, particularly in rural areas, the report notes.
The Hill
16-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Ted Lieu: Newsom would be ‘great' 2028 presidential candidate
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said on Wednesday that California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) would be a 'great' presidential candidate for the Democratic Party in 2028. Earlier on the panel, Lieu told Nexstar Media Group's Raquel Martin that Newsom, who has been often floated as one of the leading contenders for Democrats, has done a good job at pushing back against President Trump's immigration agenda. 'Gavin Newsom has been a fantastic governor of California. I was honored to have worked with him when I was in the state legislature. He was the lieutenant governor, and he is really highlighting the illegal behavior of the Department of Homeland Security, of ICE agents and border patrol agents,' Lieu told Martin. 'They cannot simply just go after someone because of their skin color, and that's what they're doing,' he said.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Top Democrat needles Republicans for not reading the ‘big, beautiful bill'
A top House Democrat is needling Republicans who helped pass President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' through the lower chamber last month but have since voiced regrets upon learning of certain provisions they didn't know were included in the 1,037-page package. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the vice chair of the House Democratic Caucus, suggested the Republicans — who have long accused Democrats of ramming massive legislation through Congress before lawmakers can learn what they're voting for — are hypocrites for seemingly doing the same with Trump's domestic agenda. 'Now we see some Republican members who are opposed to it because — guess what? — they didn't read the bill,' Lieu said Wednesday during a press briefing in the Capitol. With a late push from Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) muscled the president's domestic wish list through the House in the early hours of May 22, following a marathon overnight debate. The vote was 215 to 214, with one conservative skeptic voting 'present.' Supporters have hailed the legislation as transformative, providing tax cuts for most Americans, cracking down on immigration and expanding domestic petroleum production. But in the weeks since the bill was passed, several Republicans have said they've come to regret their support after learning of specific language in the package. Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) turned heads last week during a town hall in his district, where he acknowledged that he was unaware of a provision in the legislation that would restrict the power of federal judges to hold government officials in contempt when they violate a court order. 'I am not going to hide the truth: This provision was unknown to me when I voted for that bill,' Flood told a jeering audience, adding that he would have opposed the package if he was aware of the language sooner. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), one of Trump's most vocal congressional allies, piled on this week, saying she also would have voted against the package if she had known it included a 10-year moratorium on states regulating the artificial intelligence (AI) industry. She noted that it violates the federalist philosophy that's been a central tenet of conservatism for decades. 'Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the [bill] that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years,' Greene wrote Tuesday on the social platform X. 'I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.' Lieu, who has been a leader in Congress's bipartisan effort to examine the societal impacts of artificial intelligence, is no fan of Greene. But on this issue, he said he's behind her 100 percent. 'I agree with Marjorie Taylor Greene once every hundred years. This is that time,' Lieu said. 'I agree that this 10-year provision is extreme. It's going to cause unnecessary harm. And, look, I think the federal government is fine doing preemption when we preempt with something. You can't just preempt with nothing,' he added. 'This is a bad provision, and I hope the Senate will take out this 10-year moratorium.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
04-06-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Top Democrat needles Republicans for not reading the ‘big, beautiful bill'
A top House Democrat is needling Republicans who helped pass President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' through the lower chamber last month, but have since voiced regrets upon learning of certain provisions they didn't know were included in the 1,037-page package. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the vice chair of the House Democratic Caucus, suggested the Republicans — who have long accused Democrats of ramming massive legislation through Congress before lawmakers can learn what they're voting for — are hypocrites for seemingly doing the same with Trump's domestic agenda. 'Now we see some Republican members who are opposed to it because — guess what? — they didn't read the bill,' Lieu said Wednesday during a press briefing in the Capitol. With a late push from Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had muscled the president's domestic wish list through the House in the early hours of May 22, following a marathon overnight debate. The vote was 215 to 214, with one conservative skeptic voting 'present.' Supporters have hailed the legislation as transformative, providing tax cuts for most Americans, cracking down on immigration and expanding domestic petroleum production. But in the weeks since the bill was passed, several Republicans said they've come to regret their support after learning of specific language in the package. Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) turned heads last week during a town hall in his district, where he acknowledged that he was unaware of a provision in the legislation that would restrict the power of federal judges to hold government officials in contempt when they violate a court order. 'I am not going to hide the truth: This provision was unknown to me when I voted for that bill,' Flood told a jeering audience, adding that he would have opposed the package if he was aware of the language sooner. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), one of Trump's most vocal congressional allies, piled on this week, saying she also would have voted against the package if she had known it included a 10-year moratorium on states regulating the artificial intelligence industry. She noted that it violates the federalist philosophy that's been a central tenet of conservatism for decades. 'Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years,' Greene wrote Tuesday on X. 'I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.' Lieu, who has been a leader in Congress's bipartisan effort to examine the societal impacts of artificial intelligence, is no fan of Greene. But on this issue, he said he's behind her 100 percent. 'I agree with Marjorie Taylor Greene once every hundred years. This is that time,' Lieu said. 'I agree that this 10-year provision is extreme. It's going to cause unnecessary harm. And, look, I think the federal government is fine doing preemption when we preempt with something. You can't just preempt with nothing,' he added. 'This is a bad provision, and I hope the Senate will take out this 10-year moratorium.'
