Change In Ownership Statement (Death Of Real Property Owner: Fill & Download for Free

This is where I get frustrated. There was a moment. It was a real moment where everyone in the country agreed. Right and Left; black and white; we all agreed. There was something that needed to be done about these bad cops. It was clear that there were bad cops. No one was arguing about that.Then the craziest people say the craziest things, like, “abolish all police” because of the actions of a few. All I can say then is that the people who lead these sorts of protests do not think black lives actually matter.I say that not because of the hatred I am always accused of any time I take a stance that is not the absolute most hysterical one proposed. I say that because I actually read black authors. Thomas Sowell, Jason Riley, Larry Elders, and the honorable Justice Clarence Thomas.They will point to the specific places and times where there are the fewest police are the same settings of the most blacks killed. This isn’t because the number police are hunting down black men; it is due to crime. The places where police involvement is the strongest, i.e. where “tough on crime” policies are implemented the most is where we see the greatest reduction in the number of violent deaths of young black men.Let’s compare statistics. The two graphs below are from the CDC and depict the leading causes of death for males in the United States. I’ve highlighted this portion pertaining to homicides, where homicide accounted for 5.2% of the deaths of white boys aged 1–19.[1]For blacks, it was a very different picture. Homicide was by far the number one killers of black boys and men aged 1–44.[2]Only about 100 out of ever 100,000 black people will die from an interaction with a cop. It is the sixth most likely cause of death for young black men and boys, according to a University of Michigan study. The same study, which was trying to demonstrate the problem of police for blacks, however, showed the number three killer of blacks of the age group were those slain due to criminal homicide. Number three pretty fairly explains number six from a statistical standpoint. The odds that they will die due to crime near their homes is far, far higher. Only in those places where policing was made greater did the rate of black deaths go down.But now we’re having a conversation about police brutality, which somehow morphed into a discussion about abolishing all police everywhere. In some areas, the police, flawed as they may be, are the only thing keeping back a much worse killer of young black men. I’m just going to say, it’s probably not going to work.I want to try to do justice to the other side, and at least give credit to where this idea comes from. To many of us, the idea comes off as simply vengeance against the police. In part, it absolutely is, and anyone pretending otherwise is lying to themselves. But the other part is a sincere belief that through investments into social services, people won’t need the police.The idea behind abolishing the police is that the funds for the police don’t actually do anything to solve the systemic problems in crime ridden areas and people who commit crimes. Instead, those funds should go towards schools, welfare, housing, job programs, education, and such. It echoes the frustrations communicated by the Dallas Chief of Police David Brown when, in 2016, five of his officers were ambushed and assassinated while protecting civilian protesters during a Black Lives Matter protest.“We’re asking cops to do too much in this country,” Brown said at a briefing Monday. “We are. Every societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve. Not enough mental health funding, let the cops handle it. … Here in Dallas we got a loose dog problem; let’s have the cops chase loose dogs. Schools fail, let’s give it to the cops. … That’s too much to ask. Policing was never meant to solve all those problems.”[3]It’s true. Whenever something is wrong, cops are simultaneously blamed and called to fix the problem. This extends to being the people who have to break up families where the father is a criminal, to being the “big brother” to local kids, or saving the day when anyone has a problem with anything from animal control to needing help with directions.It also follows a particular differing world view between ideological conservatives and liberals. In an answer I wrote last month, I talked about how conservatives generally view humanity’s nature as flawed where liberals view people as generally good. Practically speaking, that’s saying that the basic conservative belief is that all people are like Lord of the Flies — devoid of a strong fabric of social institutions and traditions, people would devolve in brutal monsters and society would be unlivable. The opposite is the belief that the world is what corrupts us and that the institutions themselves are what make otherwise good people do badly. Slowly get rid of these corrupting influences and the world becomes a manifestation of the beauty within all people.People who hold the view that people are fundamentally flawed, believe that those who commit crimes are not better or worse than the rest of us, but they did fail where we did not. Crimes must be punished, to create a negative incentive against doing more crimes, both for the criminal and for everyone watching. People who hold the latter belief, that mankind’s nature is fundamentally good, believe that people who commit crimes aren’t themselves wrong, but made wrong by a society who failed them. Inequality, broken communities, poor education, a lack of opportunity, those were why people committed crimes… not their own personal actions. Where the flawed vision seeks punishment, the more optimistic vision views crime as a symptom that is fixed through a better network of aide and reformation of the whole person “back” to the good.For one, crime is a personal choice and for the other crime is a symptom of injustice.With that framework, one vision views the police and prison system as necessary to protect the rest of us from ourselves by creating disincentives to committing crimes. But the other views the prisons as rehabilitation centers and the police as a painful, inefficient, and abusive way to get people there.You can see how people who are predominately viewing the world through the vision that people are good would want to “defund police”. The theory isn’t to punish the police (although it is that, too). It is to reinvest that public funding towards ways to prevent crimes from happening. Remember, in that vision of human nature, people don’t commit crimes because of personal character flaws, but because society is responsible for making them that way. To revisit a previous image, the money should instead go to things like education, job creation, and welfare.It’s a nice idea, but will it work?Not reasonably.Let’s look at a few of the proposed solutions to crime instead of the police.HungerThe one with the most immediate effect would probably be food. The suggestion is that people are committing crimes because they are poor, or even starving. This is a false narrative. America has a very bad problem when it comes to relating the actual effects of hunger. This is because, for many years, government statistics have inflated the term “hunger” with many other things. A good example of that comes from the 2015 report from the Agriculture Department saying that “48 million Americans were living in hunger”. That is how the report’s findings were communicated, however the actual language was “food scarcity”. The USDA defined food insecurity as “uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food.” Furthermore, it doesn’t define that as a chronic condition, but at any time in the last 12 months. It’s a lot more broad and less abysmal then imagining one in six Americans starving. James Bovard of the Foundation for Economic Education criticized the finding:The definition of “food insecure” includes anyone who frets about not being able to purchase food at any point. If someone states that they feared running out of food for a single day (but didn’t run out), that is an indicator of being “food insecure” for the entire year — regardless of whether they ever missed a single meal. If someone wants organic kale but can afford only conventional kale, that is another “food insecure” indicator.[4]This same statistic, however, from the almost unchanged 2016 data, is what Nancy , Pelosi based her statements on that “1 in 5 children in America goes to sleep hungry at night because they are so poor.”[5]No. 1 in 5 children starving in the United States is a ridiculous exaggeration.In the past, a similar error in reporting happened the poverty statistics from the US census are conflated with our understanding of hunger. It is to say that anyone who falls below the poverty line was also starving, as if the two are the same. The two aren’t the same. In fact, for many poor, it is cheaper to get too many calories than it is to get the right amount leading more cases of obesity and heart problems among the poor than the chronic affects of starvation. For Americans as people beneath the poverty line in the US still can afford a stable home, a car, TV, cable internet and a cell phone.In fact, Robert Rector, one of the key architects of successful welfare reform in the 1990s, communicates a far different picture of what it means to be part of the American poor. [6]Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning.Nearly three-quarters have a car or truck; 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks.Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite television.Two-thirds have at least one DVD player, and a quarter have two or more.Half have a personal computer; one in seven has two or more computers.More than half of poor families with children have a video game system such as an Xbox or PlayStation.Forty percent have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV.Ninety-two percent of poor households have a microwave.Forty-two percent of all poor households actually own their own homes.The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.Ninety-six percent of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry at any time during the year because they could not afford food.The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and in most cases is well above recommended norms.Most poor children are, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.[7]That the majority of these people who are poor by the measure of the US census cannot afford food is… misleading.In truth, we have no idea how many people are actually hungry, or more to the point, starving from a chronic lack of food. What we can say, however, is that it is not one of the largest problems in the United States, today. While decreasing food insecurity among the rest of America should be goal, weighed against all other problems America faces, there is no clear evidence that reducing that statistic will reduce the much larger problem of black-on-black homicide. David Dorn, the 77 year old black retired police captain wasn’t killed because someone was hungry. He was killed while defending his store from a looter stealing a TV.Let’s look at the next most immediate problem that advocates of defending the police are pushing.HousingI’ve written on this elsewhere.In the case of housing, we actually have a good case of the systemic effects of racism, even if they no longer exist, carrying forth into today. New Deal programs such as the Federal Housing Administration, created in the National Housing Act of 1934, eventually worked to create a system of renters among the poor where rents became much more common than mortgages. Mortgages are a means of actual wealth creation through the purchase of real estate that usually appreciates over time and which can be passed on or sold to fund retirement. Rent doesn’t do that. Rent is a liability that buys only one period’s living and nothing else. This matters because the policies of the National Housing Agency and later the Federal Housing Agency which grew out of it created one of the most systematically devastating programs in the history of blacks in America since Jim Crow.Beginning in the 1960s, the US government began heavily subsidizing new home development, however, they didn’t do this equally. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development was created by the Johnson administration as part of the War on Poverty. It was intended to help the urban poor to resettle into home ownership. Remember owning homes was a path to wealth creation for the middle class and seen as the greatest predictor for wealth later on. However, what the program actually did was channel whites out of the cities into rural areas surrounding the cities. With the rise of cars and highways, these tracts of land grew into the modern suburbs. Blacks, on the other hand, were given “opportunities” to live in densely packed high rise buildings near the inner cities. These became known as the Projects.The Projects concentrated a population of poor people into an extremely small geography. Anyone studying demographics at the time could have pointed out that this would be a recipe for crime, declining education, and would over saturate the local job market with too many mouths to feed and not enough job creation. This is not to mention the fact that as crime rises, education falls, and wealth diminishes, investment into new business drops creating a downward feedback loop. Add to it the fact that people have literally been piled sky high and you create a powder keg of everything necessary to see inner cities become war zones. Again, any demographic statistician could have predicted this regardless of whether they were talking about the American blacks or not because the same effects happen anywhere in the world where this kind of experiment under these conditions is tried.Was this clear systemic racism? I think so. I think there was an intentional element of racism in at least some of the planners of this scheme under the Johnson Administration that pushed whites to the unsettled suburbs, leading to the largest rise in wealth in human history, and the nightmare scenario that became the Projects for black people.But even then, maybe there is an argument that it wasn’t quite as racist as even I am suspicious of. One could argue that at a time when America was still a manufacturing powerhouse, or to be more precise, when factories benefited from being massive places where thousands of people with no real need of higher education could work and have a meaningful and happy life while providing for a healthy and happy family. Many factories in the same area benefited from one another, sharing talent and a culture of expertise not unlike modern Silicon Valley. It made sense to stack people up as many as could fit near them, from an urban planning perspective, perhaps. More factories were good for America and at the time, it was also good for blacks and other urban poor working them. They were working their way out of poverty.But then Free Trade happened. As the rest of world recovered from WWII, it became profitable for the continued wealth of the nation to start looking to external means of production, such as creating incentives to move manufacturing to Mexico or China. This wasn’t racially motivated at all, championed by both the Democrats and Republicans and in fact, encouraged by a progressive ideology of globalism. So it was great for certain already wealthy parts of America and greater yet for the rest of the world, but an absolute economic disaster if you have already created entire cities dependent on the idea that there will be tens of thousands of low skill, high paying jobs a few blocks away… as in, the Projects. So in a very real and tangible way, while much of the country became very rich from international free trade, blacks were devastated and mostly because they believed in an idea that would raise them out of poverty lasting perpetually.If we really, honestly look at what has been happening to the black communities since the 1960s, during a period where racism has played less, and less, and less of a factor every single year, but where the problems of black poverty seem even more overwhelming for blacks to overcome and consider the problems not just as a problem of racist whites, but as a consequence of many bad policy decisions that came together to create a perfect storm of terribleness for blacks in America, you start to realize that there is an incredibly high likelihood that the policies intended to help are more to blame than the sinister machinations of evil whites.So housing is another area where blacks should be concerned. Rent can be expensive, but generational poverty is more expensive. All the plans to “help” the poor blacks where, at best, convoluted and required the American economy to remain unchanged indefinitely while paradoxically growing forever. This is if we ignore the very real suspicions that they very policies were racist themselves by design in how they divided the poor whites from the poor blacks. Either way, the collapse of American manufacturing led to many of the problems we saw beginning in the 1980s and 1990s with exploding crime rates among the inner cities.That leads us to jobs.JobsThe government can’t create jobs out of thin air. They can, but only for government jobs. These jobs, however, are risky at best because they are tax-payer supported, and all tax payer supported jobs are at risk of being viewed as parasitical by taking money away from other programs or even, just artificially, taking too much in taxes for sake of saying jobs were produced. Case in point — the police, right here, in this question. If one argues that we should defund the police, you’re arguing that the jobs of many police officers aren’t really needed. All government jobs are weighed against the value they put into the community. If they can, however, be automated, or the same result gained through other means, then those jobs don’t last long.So the government doesn’t create jobs. The only thing the government can do is help nurture the environment for opportunity. Opportunity creates work and work creates jobs. By this, the US government does more for American jobs by implementing some program like building up new means of transportation like the US interstate system (which lowered the cost of transportation within the US and thereby raising opportunity for manufacturers) than it does with most jobs programs, providing tax payer subsidies to hire for businesses that couldn’t or shouldn’t otherwise afford the extra labor.The other way that government can influence jobs is by creating policies that create the environments where job creators leave. A good example of that came from the last few weeks.A Minneapolis manufacturing company has decided to leave the city, with the company’s owner saying he can’t trust public officials who allowed his plant to burn during the recent riots. The move will cost the city about 50 jobs.“They don’t care about my business,” said Kris Wyrobek, president and owner of 7-Sigma Inc., which has operated since 1987 at 2843 26th Av. in south Minneapolis. “They didn’t protect our people. We were all on our own.”That’s one company of about 50 jobs that will no longer be in the city. There will be more who will take what work opportunities exist, and they will leave, too. These companies will make major investments in places where they feel they will find long term success. That will not be in places where entrepreneurs and investors fear things like high crime. Beyond the obvious risk to the business of robbery or vandalism, high crime areas also erode property values, and drive out talent who might make a business prosper and grow. Over the course of years, it also reduces the investment pool for further new businesses.So focusing on job creation instead of ensuring that crimes are dealt with fails in that it:Reduces business investmentReduces the number of jobsReduces wealth creationReduces property valuesWhat is the link in all these? Those are where we get our taxes. If, for some reason, crime isn’t reduced after defunding the police, the pool of money used to fund all these other programs is itself going to be shrink. If “increased investment in community initiatives” doesn’t have a major impact, then one by one, these initiatives will fall. At that point, without policing or community initiatives, the only possible word for such a system is anarchy.EducationThe last major call is to defund the police to fund more in education. I’ve worked as a public school teacher and my wife is a currently a teacher. I’m sympathetic to this one. It’s clear that better education can put someone on the track to a better life. This is true — of individuals. As a community planning policy, education can’t happen if the lower levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs aren’t met. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology that states that a person can’t achieve the important processes of development, if their lower needs aren’t met. Below educational needs are things like safety and security. Simply, if a person doesn’t first feel safe, he isn’t going to get much from education.Second, while some politicians have defended the call to defund police by saying “we’ve defunded education for decades and look where that got us,” not only is that a misdirection, but it’s also demonstrably false.The US has not defunded education. In reality, it spends more per student than any other country.Furthermore, while education spending continued to increase, there is no clear indication that education itself it has. That is to say that in America, more funding doesn’t clearly show better education. The fact that so many call for more funding doesn’t mean the problems revolve around not enough money, but how it’s spent.The education system is fraught with other problems, so many that it doesn’t help to go into it here. But simply pouring more money into a leaky bucket doesn’t actually improve failing schools. Evidence shows us that schools aren’t failing from a lack of funding as much as other systemic failures that will exist just the same with 10 times the funding they currently have. If we want to fix education, robbing from the police departments to fund more of it will not solve the problem anywhere in the United States. Education itself must be reformed.The last problem is also obvious.If we take away from policing to support education… even if it would work… it would take about 20 years to show fruits of that labor. That’s about the time it would take a child raised in a rough neighborhood to grow up and graduate, becoming a productive member of the community. During that 20 years, he will have to endure a policeless environment where crime will not be stopped and where the criminals may, in fact, be the source of order, as we saw with gang warfare in the 1980s and 90s. The temptation, or even, to sell drugs or take part in other illicit activities to support a family in need will be great. Or maybe that’s just the best job they can find and don’t care enough about the consequences. If he survives that life unscathed, he will also be choosing between two very different realities — should he take up one of the jobs in his neighborhood, or should he seek work elsewhere? Most, will move on, leaving the old neighborhood behind them. This disgenic cycle is another reason why other things need to happen first for education to truly have an impact, and part of that is an immediate reduction in crime, something which can only happen through strong policing.BureaucracyThe final reason I think these programs will fail is that someone has to be in charge of them, and not just them, but many other programs. The reason that we’re attempting this complex network of new social programs is to have an indirect response — reducing crime. It’s not altogether obvious why any one investiture will reduce crimes, and as I’ve shown, the chances that any will in fact improve much is low. But we need all of them to maybe work.That’s dangerous.It’s like what happens when traditions go away. There are things we do just because we’ve always done them, with no real idea of why. Stop doing them. Suddenly, new problems no one expected start popping up to ruin our beautiful schemes of efficiency and planning. That’s because, often traditional methods are formed to solve a problem, and the tradition lives on protecting us from that problem long after we forgot about the problem in the first place. If you want an example, read through the Bible’s book of Leviticus. It reads like a list of the senseless draconian laws of a bronze age era nomadic culture, but read it closer and realize how many of the laws protected them from diseases no one would understand the cause of for another 4,000 years.This idea of investing into numerous social programs is like that, too. Say it works. Great, crime is reduced. But how do you convince a future bean counter that you need to keep investing in all of these programs, when it is unclear how exactly any one of them contributes to the real problem of crime? You won’t. Instead, they will look at education and rank it according to education, housing according to housing, food according to food, and so on. “We don’t have this problem,” they’ll say, and a program will get cut. At some point, there will be a crisis and a call for austerity, and people will start slowly defunding one or two more of these “antiquated” programs.Then what?Some pencil pusher makes a huge bonus by saving the state and municipality ten million dollars by cutting “excess funding” from programs that no longer serve their “original function.” Then, a few years later, crime starts creeping back in. Look, call it cynical, but also call it realistic. This idea, this hope, is too complex with far too few proofs that it will work. Instead, what will probably happen is that we may spend a great deal to achieve marginal gains, but those gains will soon be lost through the natural and unrelenting push of bureaucratic incompetence, as all good social programs eventually succumb to.Better WaysIt’s obvious that defunding the police is an idealistic approach to urban planning policy, like so many others. It’s also not without the palpable vein of vengeance. It is, however, being pushed in large part by non-urban idealistic white liberals who will not suffer the long term effects of their policies, also like so many others. This has been the criticism of many black conservatives, and is the central focus of the book “Please Stop Helping US: How Liberals Make it Harder for Blacks to Succeed” by Jason L. Riley. I recommend everyone, conservative or liberal, legitimately concerned with the plight of blacks in America and not simply engaging in the outrage issue du jour, should start by reading his book. It is a clear look from economic and historical perspectives of the other side of the argument.I don’t like to complain when I have no better solution to the problem. Here, I think that defunding the police is a suicidal plan for the long term success of black neighborhoods. Abolishing it is even more obvious, but something so extreme as to lend credibility to the less absurd defunding.Instead, some other things should have been tried first.In an answer I wrote last week, I talked about a method that is far more practical and has better chances of bringing real reforms, based on how the military solves problems. Hold the chain of command responsible. When something goes wrong, it is up the supervisor to issue discipline, but when something goes seriously wrong, it is up to the supervisor to be held accountable for his oversight. In this case, with Derek Chauvin, the police officer with his knee over George Floyd’s throat, it seemed to all of us that there was criminal negligence leading to the death of someone placed under the arrest, and care, of the Minneapolis police department. That should be a call to investigate not only Derek Chauvin, but who ever leads, trains, and ultimately ensures he stays on the force. There should be an investigation of his supervisor, as well… and his, all the way up the chain up to Police Chief Medaria Arradondo. Even if the death of George Floyd were to be all there was, the chief should be investigated. Seeing the chaos and numerous abuses of the entire force with the riots that followed, I don’t know why more people aren’t calling for his removal.Mind you, he’s just the lowest ranking member I can name. I’m saying every supervisor directly between Derek Chauvin and him needs to be removed from leadership positions one way or another.No, not only am I saying that the immediate supervisors need to be investigated, probably fired, and perhaps even charged, and that the higher ranking supervisors need to be charged, but the elected officials need to also be investigated and impeached for the sheer incompetence leading up to right now, such as Mayor Jacob Frey.Oh, no, but I’m not done. I also think that Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota should be impeached. People should be asking questions about if he failed in this, what should be done.Mind you, “impeached” has lost a lot of its meaning in recent years. Where many politicians openly called for the impeachment of Donald Trump before he even took office, and the following three year spectacle that was, impeachment isn’t supposed to be about firing people. It was intended to happen far more often for investigating failures in the public view and determining if something more could have reasonably been done by the leaders in charge. If the investigation proves that these leaders either did the best they could, or that they simply don’t have the power to act, then changes can be made to the process empowering them and their successors to better do their jobs in the future. If, however, they had the opportunity and botched the responsibility, then the impeachments need to lead to their removal from office.I’ve heard absolutely nothing in any of this about holding the leaders responsible. There’s be numerous calls to charge all four of the officers responsible of murder. I’ve seen that explode into blind hatred towards all police officers, including abolishing and defunding them altogether. But I have yet to hear a serious conversation about investigating either Police Chief Medaria Arradondo, Mayor Jacob Frey, or Governor Tim Walz. None. To me, that would have been the first option.Leaders are the people who write the rules. Leaders select people they expect to follow the rules. Leaders enforce the rules. Most importantly, leaders demonstrate how to do their jobs within the rules.If you want to radically correct the culture of an organization, then you don’t make a big show of holding the lowest of level of people responsible. Worse, you don’t just brand all people who wear a badge as hopelessly corrupt murderers who need to be defunded You change out the entire leadership of everyone responsible for them. That’s the fastest and most effective means of changing a broken culture of incompetence and corruption. More discussion needs to center on holding that department in that city and that state accountable, as well as any others where failure is demonstrated, rather than demanding we punish all cops everywhere or even worse, defund and abolish an institution vital to the protection of the very people most vulnerable.But there is one more solution that has been tried successfully worth bringing up, the example of Camden, New Jersey.In 2013, the city of Camden, NJ was suffering some of the worst effects of the prolonged recession starting in 2008. It had some the highest violent crime and murder rates in the nation. That year, the city dissolved the old Camden Police Department and reconstituted it as the Camden County Metro Police. Led by then governor Chris Cristi and other local officials, they created a public-safety department within the Camden county government dedicated to the city of Camden before disbanding the police department.From there, they were able to reform their practices. This included enacting an entirely new union contract which removed wasteful practices and rules that may have been good for creating jobs for cops, but kept those cops in offices and off the streets where they were needed.Immediately after, officials invited all of the former Camden police officers to reapply for their jobs and rehired most, but being selective in not hiring known bad apples into the new force. [8]The overall quality of the force was improved as since then, violent crimes per 1,000 people have dropped from 79 to 44.[9]The new department is more involved in the community, more efficient, and has less barriers to doing the jobs of police officers.Disbanding a whole police department sounds extreme. It is. It is far more extreme then my suggestion to hold the chain of command responsible, but nowhere near as radical as defunding the police or abolishing them altogether. At no point did the citizens of Camden not have a police department. One day, they had a bad police department; the next day, they had a reformed police department made up of mostly the same good cops, but now more empowered to do their jobs.For this plan to work it took a lot of people realizing a few things. It’s possible to have a structure that works against itself. It’s possible for years of practices, policies, and routines to pile up, or for inefficient positions to be created which can’t legally be removed. It might also be impossible to remove some bad people, who deserve to be fired or whose position just shouldn’t exist, thanks to unions that overreached their mandate. All of these things could be true, and a police department still be filled with good cops who want the best for their communities. What’s more, the process actually saved a lot of money from the old way of policing, so Camden could use that money either to invest in their new police department, or attempt some of these community minded experiments being lauded about today.Defunding the police department, with no other Camden-like reforms, does none of this. In fact, it’s worse. It tells the police that they are now expected to do the same job with less funding. This might mean that the same inefficient organizational structures, same bad policies, and many of the same bad people stay in place because legally there is nothing that can be done about them. Think, if Camden had been told, “We’re punishing you by taking away tens of millions from your budget, but you still have to do the same job”, they probably would have been forced to let go of a lot of their officers and as past models show, they probably would have asked many to voluntarily leave and seek other jobs. What normally happens in those cases is that those who can move and are great, jump ship and get jobs at better departments, leaving only the people who absolutely must stay with the community and those cops who are terrible at their jobs. Think about that. You cut funding and leave only the worst cops.This is a death spiral.You know how we know? Look at Minneapolis. Piggy backing off of Anthony Galli’ excellent answer is this quote from the Minneapolis mayor:“We know that when officers are doing more overtime and they're overworked, they're more fatigued. When they're more fatigued, they're more likely to use force.” He was concerned seeing a report note that 30% of overtime in 2018 was due to staff shortages and another 6% was due to "possible" staff shortages. Mayor Frey continued, “The best way to combat staff shortages is to hire more staff, yes. I think that's one important element to both public safety and police community relations.” [2]As well as this, from the police chief over a year ago.Minneapolis is what a city looks like with a defunded police department. So if more cities want to go that route, they’re playing an experiment in which we already know the results.I’m just a little dumbfounded at some of the people making statements calling for defunding the police, or abolishing them outright, when better options are not only available, but obvious. It comes off not just as needlessly virtue signalling, ignorant of better, and less suicidal methods to improve their communities. It might serve some, like the Mayor of Los Angeles, to say these things for national attention from people who ultimately will not suffer or gain from it. Some people want this to work so bad, but that doesn’t mean there is any reason to believe it will other then blind ideology. Some are simply embracing a vengeful attitude towards the cops, which serves absolutely no one. Given the costs, the real costs, I fear that what we’re going to see in some of these areas a return to the violence and chaos of the 1990s. And, so that no one forgets, that hurt blacks and the poor most of all.Relaxed. Researched. Respectful. - War ElephantFootnotes[1] From the CDC-Leading Causes of Death-Males Non-Hispanic white 2017[2] From the CDC-Leading Causes of Death-Non-Hispanic Black Males 2017[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/grief-and-anger-continue-after-dallas-attacks-and-police-shootings-as-debate-rages-over-policing/[4] No, 48 Million Americans Are Not Going Hungry | James Bovard[5] Pelosi Misrepresents Childhood 'Hunger' Data[6] The War on Poverty After 50 Years[7] 40 Million Americans Are Living in Poverty? FALSE[8] Camden, NJ, did police reform right — not that radicals will pay attention[9] Ex police chief says crime went down when they disbanded the force

We break down the registration procedure into 8 simple steps for your better understanding.IntroductionDocument verificationSale agreement drafting & executionHome loanTDSStamp duty & registration chargesSale deed drafting & executionAfter-sale deed registrationBelow is the description of each step.Introduction (between buyer & seller)Even when the buyer and seller have agreed on the deal, they are typically always on the back foot and are equally anxious about the outcome and the next steps to take forward.There is always a lingering feeling that the other party may back out or provide unpleasant surprise So, it is crucial that buyer & seller agree to the terms, conditions, and timelines of the sale without leaving any loose ends so that no disputes arise later. Both the buyer and seller have their legitimate concerns - and these have to be addressed judiciously. That is exactly what the sale agreement is drafted and executed.2. Document verification :Generally, properties are bought under two circumstances. They are,Under construction propertyReady to move-in propertyEspecially we have to be more conscious when we book under-construction property because you have more to verify, right from land document to possession letter.Never ever initiate the booking transaction unless the documents are verified. Some unprofessional sellers may not support document verification unless the booking amount is paid. Avoid such seller or be strong on your stand to verify the document before initiating the transaction.Here is the list of few important documents to verifyMother deedSale deedEncumbrance certificate (EC)Khata certificate & extractLatest tax paid receiptRTC ExtractBuilding approval plan (For Bangalore, BIAPPA/BDA approval)No objection certificate from bank if property bought on loan (NOC)No objection certificate from association/ society office / Maintenance office (NOC)Latest utility bills - electricity and waterAadhar of sellerFamily tree and death certificate if the property was inheritedGeneral Power of Attorney / Power of attorney/ Special power of attorney, if applicable3. Sale agreement drafting & execution:“Agreement for sale”, popularly know as sale agreement. It is a judicial promissory note to sell the property in further date under the terms & conditions mentioned in the agreement.It is a legally binding agreement and helps to build complete trust between buyer & seller to accomplish an ownership transfer without any hassle.Documents require to draft a sale agreement,Absolute Sale deed of sellerKhata certificate & extractLatest tax paid receiptEncumbrance certificate (EC)Below is the list of few important clauses to be in sale agreement.The date on which the sale agreement is being executedName, Father/Husband’s Name, Age, Address and PAN card details of the Vendor(s) and Purchaser(s)Schedule of the propertyTitle flow of the propertyTotal sale consideration, i.e. the total sale valueAdvance payment, balance payment & mode of paymentTimeline for completing the transaction, i.e. registering the sale deedVendor obligationsNon-solicitation by VendorDispute handling mechanismDefault, exit, and penalty clauseScheduleIn general, a sale agreement has 3 sub-schedules. For example, Schedule A, Schedule B, and Schedule CSchedule A: refer to a large portion of the project. probably measured in acresSchedule B: refer to the exact unit of the project. Measurement of your flat size in sq.ft or sq/mt.Schedule C: refer to the undivided land share. Measure in sq.ft or sq/mt.As per the Karnataka Stamp Act, the stamp duty for sale agreement is 0.1% of consideration value.For example purchase value Is Rs. 50 Lakh. Stamp duty is Rs.50,00,000 X 0.1% = 5,000/-Stamp duty paid is Rs. 5,000/- in the mode of e-stamp paper or franked at the sub-register office by making the payment in the mode of DD.Note: sale agreement stamp duty can be offset at the time of sale deed registration. Offset is applicable only if you choose franking mode. Offset is not applicable to e-stamping.The minimum stamp duty is Rs. 200 to the max is Rs. 20,000.Both buyer and seller must sign sale agreement. Must sign at the bottom of all pages and execution pages. Two witnesses have to sign at the execution page.4. Home Loan:Step by step procedure for home loan process to buy a residential property in Bangalore.Eligibility CheckPre Approval loan letter from a bankExecute the sale agreementSubmit your personal documents (Passport size photo, PAN, Aadhar, 6-month bank statement, salary slip, IT return for the last two year.Fill the home loan applicationSubmit Property DocumentsHome Loan SanctionPreparing the Sale DeedHome Loan Disbursement5. TDS:From June 1st, 2013, when a buyer buys immovable property (i.e. a building or part of a building or any land other than agricultural land) costing more than ₹ 50 lakhs, he has to deduct TDS when he pays the seller. This has been laid out in Section 194-IA of the Income Tax Act.Here are the requirements of this section:The buyer has to deduct TDS at 1% of the total sale consideration. Note that the buyer is required to deduct TDS, not the seller.No TDS is deducted if sale consideration is less than ₹ 50 lakhs. If installments are being paid, TDS has to be deducted on each installment.Tax is to be paid on the entire sale amount. For example, if you have bought a house at ₹ 55 lakh, you have to pay tax on ₹ 55 lakh and not on ₹ 5 lakh (i.e. ₹ 55 lakh – ₹ 50lakh). This is applicable even when there is more than 1 buyer or seller.If you are the buyer, you do not need to obtain a TAN (Tax Deduction Account Number) number.If you are the seller, you have to provide your PAN or else TDS is deducted at 20%. PAN of the buyer is also mandatory. TDS is deducted at the time of payment or at the time of giving credit to the seller, whichever is earlier.This TDS has to be deposited along with Form 26QB within 7 days from the end of the month on which TDS was deducted.After depositing TDS to the government, the buyer is required to furnish the TDS certificate to the seller. This is available around 10-15 days after depositing the TDS.Thus for paying TDS, the seller is required to obtain Form 16B and the buyer is required to obtain Form 26QB.6. Stamp duty & Registration charges:To boost the real-estate sentiment in the State, the Karnataka government has announced a cut in the stamp duty rate on properties priced below 35 lakh.The announcement was made on 27th May 2020 during the COVID 19 pandemics.The focus is to boost affordable housing in the state. Below are the latest stamp duty and registration charges.The stamp duty & registration charge calculation goes as belowExample 1: The purchase price is Rs. 20 Lakh,Stamp duty : 20,00,000*2% = Rs.40,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Registration charge : 20,00,000*1% = Rs.20,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Cess : 20,00,000*0.5% = Rs.10,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Example 2: The purchase price is Rs. 35 Lakh,Stamp duty : 35,00,000*3% = Rs. 1,05,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Registration charge : 35,00,000*1% = Rs.35,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Cess : 35,00,000*0.5% = Rs.17500/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Example 3: The purchase price is Rs. 80 Lakh,Stamp duty : 80,00,000*5% = Rs. 4,00,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Registration charge : 80,00,000*1% = Rs.80,000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Cess : 80,00,000*0.5% = Rs.40000/- (DD on the name of respective sub-register office)Note: stamp duty, registration charge, and cess are based on consideration price or market price. whichever is higher. The intention of market price is to avoid the underpayment of stamp duty and registration charge.7. Sale deed drafting & registration:The sale deed is a legal document that contains details of transfer of property ownership from a seller to a Buyer. This is one of the most valuable legal documents while purchasing or selling a property. It is executed at the time of actual transfer of property ownership at a sub-registrar’s office. This document needs to be registered mandatorily and is governed by the Registration Act.It is usually drafted as a continuation of the sale agreement. All the terms and conditions mentioned in the former would be fulfilled and observed in a deed of sale. A sale deed is also otherwise known as conveyance deed. It is also proof that the buyer is the absolute owner of the said property.Clauses must-have in a sale deed draft are,The date on which sale deed is being executedName, Father/Husband’s Name, Age, Address and PAN card details of the Vendor(s) and Purchaser(s)Schedule of the propertyTitle flow of the propertyTotal sale consideration i.e. total sale valueMode of payment & Transaction numbersVendor obligations and declarationsIndemnification by vendorNon-solicitation by VendorTDS detailsScheduleDocuments require to draft sale deed:Seller sale deedCurrent year khata certificate & extractCurrent year tax paid receiptCurrent year encumbrance certificatePrint the sale deed draft on document paper (bond paper). Print one side of the paper, avoid back to back printing.Decide the respective sub-register office to register the property. On the day of property registration, carry the following documents to sub-register office.Printed sale deedExecuted sale agreement along with its stamp duty paid receiptCurrent year tax paid receiptCurrent year’s khatha certificate and khatha extractAadhar (Linking of mobile number is mandatory for digital signing - Digital signing at registration is easy and convenient)The buyer and seller should sign at all pages of sale deed. Two witnesses have to sign at the witness section.8. After the registration:Get the encumbrance certificate printout immediately after the registration. . Buyer name should reflect in new encumbrance certificateIf the property bought on loan, take the photocopy of sale deed and get true copy attestation from an advocate before handing back the sale deed to bank. You may not get access to the original sale deed until the loan is cleared.Meanwhile, true copy attestation helps to proceed for property tax application, khata transfer application, and name change in utility bills.This completes the procedure for registration of residential property in Bangalore.We provide the service of,Document verificationSale agreement drafting & executionSale deed drafting & executionTo opt for our service, please write to us [email protected] or Whatsapp +91–9742479020.Thank you for reading…

Researching property owners in California appears simple with so many public records available. Looking up property deeds and tax records in every county only require the property address.Many California counties make this information available online. But, California state law prohibits tax assessors from publishing identifying information like a homeowner’s name online without written permission from the owner.Take These Steps to Find California Property Owners InformationLocal California Tax Assessor ResearchEvery city and/or county assessing property taxes maintains records of property ownership in its jurisdiction. Members of the public enjoy the right to search the records for free.In fact, besides property ownership, the public may search:Property Tax exemptions;Tax rates;Tax liens; andProperty assessment values.California Property Deed SearchesThe local Recorder’s Office (or County Clerk) records all property deeds of ownership, property transfers, and related legal documents. Some California counties call it the Registrar of Deeds office. These offices maintain up to date property records.This includes the current property owner’s name.You will find a recorder’s offices in the county courthouse or other county buildings. But, some sit in a city hall like the San Francisco Deed Recorder.Visit any recorder’s office and use one of their public computer terminals to do research. Their staff can assist you with your search. For a small fee, they provide you with copies of registered documents.Private Online Record Search in CaliforniaMany real estate websites get public ownership data from different sources. Some offer this information for free. For instance, Realtor, Trulia, and Zillow allow you to search their listed properties by area.SearchSystems, a family-owned business since 1990, allows you to search Free Public Records over 70,000 databases. Do your property searches by state, county, city, and zip code. Also, search:Mortgages;Deeds;Licenses;Business registrations;Criminal records;Divorce records;Marriage records;Death records;Corporate records; andMany other public records.However, their Free Service limited to one search by state, county, or city at a time. Their “Premium” databases cost a small fee which expands your searches nationwide or statewide to find more public records quickly.Tricks to Track Down California Commercial Property OwnersWhile searching for home owner’s information becomes easy, finding owners of California commercial properties becomes difficult.That’s because commercial real estate (CRE) owners in California take the title in different forms. For instance, commercial properties owned by a corporation, partnership, LLC, Trust, or other legal entities.With 58 counties in California each maintaining its own system of property deeds and records, makes the research complex.As mentioned above, not every California Registrar or Recorder office provides online search platforms. For example, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder doesn’t allow online public searches.But, the San Diego County Clerk’s office allows online searches.California Secretary of StateThe greatest challenge with researching California commercial property owners occurs when you run into a legal entity.A corporation, LLC, or trust remains anonymous.When you run into an LLC you must ask “Who owns the LLC?”The best way to research the LLC starts with the California Secretary of State office. But, limits occur.For instance, if you type in “Who owns an LLC?” in the Secretary of State’s database, you get this reply: “There were no results found. Please try another keyword or phrase”.If you look at the top in the Secretary of State’s website next to “About” you find “Business”. Click on that and you’ll see:“The Secretary of State’s office processes filings, maintains records and provides information to the public relating to business entities that include corporations, limited liability companies, limited partnerships, general partnerships, limited liability partnerships, and other business filings.” SourceThen, you need to go to their Business Entities web page to learn about LLC filings and required information along with news, updates, law changes, etc.There, you click on “Business Search” which states:“This search provides access to available information for corporations, limited liability companies and limited partnerships of record with the California Secretary of State, with free PDF copies of imaged business entity documents, including the most recent imaged Statements of Information filed for corporations and limited liability companies.” SourceThen, you search by the LLCs name or entity number.