So you are saying that if the Electorate of Berkeley want to spend their local tax money on renting a refrigerated warehouse to store the shopping carts of the homeless, they shouldn't because "you know better"? That they can't spend their money on projects they choose?
Is this Quixote guy one of the Liberal Elite after all? ;-)
From my point of view, the electorate of Berkely a) can spend their money on what they want and b) this is probably less harmful than promoting "A living wage for workers in the Sex Industry" (that was an issue on the ballot in Berkeley during the last election), free needle exchanges to promote IV drug use or a dozen other projects of the Berkeley government.
And don't even consider returning the shopping carts to the original owners. In Berkeley, once a shopping cart (or almost anything else) is expropriated by The People the original owner has lost title
Signed
A guy who was once stupid enough to own rental real estate in Berkeley
that is the trouble with news stories..they leave out the nitty gritty of the "true" story... she probably had paper work to prove the hubby died in another state..but you will never find out..until much later if at all..besides the state has only so much money to pursue these things and contrary to CSI ,they dont spend a fortune on old bones that turn up in a desert(ie)