Let 'em stay. They're not hurting anybody.

Look at what the respondents chose. In this headline-focused readership culture, be careful about what you choose.

It wouldn't have to be a tax, just some sort of encouragement to make the most out of the underutilized space. CCA, your argument doesn't address the issue--that property owners don't have an incentive to contribute to the areas that others live in... especially since many don't live there themselves. Not everything is zero-sum

Ugh. All I gleaned from this article (with excellent reporting from Melissa, as usual), is that people are whiners. Panhandling? Waaaa! I can't park in front of my exact destination, and have to walk 5 blocks. Maaaaaaaaahhhhhh! A permitting process that requires business owners to re-up? Oh-no-you-di'-int! There are lots of people who are doing what they can to work within the constraints that they have. That what creativity looks like. Not paving over open lots. Food droughts are common in urban areas, but I don't think most of the grid qualifies as one. If the major concern is melted ice cream, then it's not a food desert. That said, I think the old Greyhound station on L would be perfect for a Whole Foods or other grocery chain to take advantage of an underserved area. Or an open-market deal, which could stay open evenings and weekends.

First, Marcos Breton didn't write this, so invoking his name seems less than fair. I understand, though, the wackos in the SacBee's comments section are scary stupid. Your points about the public/private employment are well taken. What concerns me is the upward trend of demonizing public-sector workers, most of whom do a good job and make life easier, cleaner, or safer for the rest of us. Yes, bureaucracy can get in the way, but not to an extent that public-sector leaders are evil or poorly-intentioned.