Category: California

Posted on

Problems with SB 79 after Amendments

  • SB 79 still does not provide for enough affordable housing.
  • SB 79 will reduce affordable housing by allowing older, naturally affordable buildings to be replaced by largely market-rate buildings.
  • Local control of affordable inclusionary housing in SB 79 projects is a red herring  – HCD severely limits this “option”.  Local inclusionary built under
  • SB 79  should override any limitations by state administrative agencies.
  • SB 79 is a major state override of local control. – overrides the state approved housing element and mandates unneeded density in inappropriate places.
  • The bill is misleading by offering local control through allowing alternate plans by localities. – Any such plan still requires inappropriate density, overrides the state approved housing element, and requires approval of HCD.
  • Bus routes are an inappropriate basis for rezoning property. Routes can change or be manipulated in weeks. The housing built under SB 79 will be permanent.
  • SB 79 needs a 5 year sunset clause.

 

Posted on

A ‘poison pill’ in California’s budget deal ties state spending to construction

By Alexei Koseff : calmatters – excerpt

IN SUMMARY: A state budget is headed to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature, but it won’t take effect unless the Legislature makes changes to housing and infrastructure development rules that he has demanded…

After days of confusion in which a deal with Gov. Gavin Newsom threatened to unravel over his demand to include new housing and infrastructure regulations, the California Legislature passed an updated state budget on Friday.

With the start of a new fiscal year looming on July 1, budget negotiations — already challenged by a $12 billion and growing deficit — dragged on this week as Newsom and legislative leaders struggled to reach an agreement on waiving state environmental reviews for priority projects.

The details of that proposal were only made public Friday morning, hours before the budget vote, despite a poison pill that would invalidate the entire $321 billion spending plan if the Legislature does not also approve the infrastructure proposal, Senate Bill 131. Lawmakers are expected to take it up on Monday, alongside the housing measure Newsom sought, Assembly Bill 130, which was unveiled and then amended this week following fierce blowback from organized labor.

Officials involved in those negotiations have been loath to explain why the budget process staggered to such an odd and protracted conclusion this year, even as California is now set to adopt sweeping changes to how it builds without much public notice. Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas refused to speak with reporters after the vote…

The final budget relies on reserves and internal borrowing … (more)

Internal borrowing?

Posted on

SF plan to add housing density set to go before lawmakers

: sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

San Francisco’s yearslong, often-contentious campaign to redraw its zoning map reached a major milestone Tuesday when Mayor Daniel Lurie formally submitted the legislative package for his “family zoning” plan, which aims to add housing density throughout The City’s western and northern neighborhoods.

“For too long, San Francisco made it easier to block homes than to build them,” Lurie said, during a press conference to highlight the legislative advance.

Lurie delivered his remarks in front of a five-story affordable development in San Francisco’s Westwood Park neighborhood that was built in the wake of a previous round of upzoning…

City leaders must approve an up zoning plan that passes muster with California authorities by January 2026 or risk penalties that include state funding cuts as well as the loss of more control over local development decisions.

But even as Lurie’s legislative package moves forward, a number of key companion measures — intended to address widespread unease about the up zoning proposals — remain very much on the drawing board.

Those measures include separate legislative packages that would add additional safeguards for tenants and small businesses. They have been drawn up in collaboration with progressive housing activists who warn that if The City fails to act, the proposed up zoning ordinance could unleash a wave of evictions, as redevelopment projects proliferate and displace longstanding tenants.

“At this point, it seems like everyone’s working diligently” to draft the companion measures, People Power Media cofounder Joseph Smooke, who has been helping to lead the advocacy campaign surrounding the rezoning effort.

Nevertheless, Smooke said, “we’re cautious of course, because the schedules could become out of sync quickly.”

Advocates are also pushing The City to adopt stronger preservation standards for historic buildings and to draw up an inventory of sites that are suitable for the development of publicly-funded affordable housing.

During the Tuesday morning press conference, Planning Department officials said The City is still on track to pass the companion measures alongside the central rezoning legislation.

“We’re ensuring that this plan reflects local voices and local values, and will continue to do that as it moves through the adoption process,” said Sarah Dennis Phillips, who has been leading the Office of Economic and Workforce Development but is now set to replace Planning Director Rich Hillis after he recently announced plans to resign from the role…. (more)

 

Posted on

The Bay Area has hundreds of below-market rate apartments sitting vacant

By Katalerico : mercurynews – excerpt

Some new moderate-income units offer little discount to market-rate rents. Some question whether we should prioritize building them at all

In April 2023, a new luxury apartment complex on Alameda’s waterfront, Launch, opened to renters, advertising views of the yacht club from its rooftop deck, poolside cabanas and a co-working lounge.

As required by Alameda’s inclusionary zoning law, the developer, Pacific Development, set aside 49 of the 368 units for low- and moderate-income households making between 50% to 120% of the area median income, $51,800 to $124,250 for a single person. The idea was to fill the complex with a variety of tenants, not just the kind of renters who could afford $3,000 a month.

Two years later, the results are mixed: units for the poorest tenants have filled, but all 19 designated for moderate-income renters — the so-called “missing middle” — remain empty, much to the frustration of the developer, Sean Murphy.

“The last thing we want to do as a developer is build housing units that sit vacant,” he said. “That doesn’t solve any social problems.”…(more)

Posted on

Unprecedented vote shows Dems fractured over housing policy

By Ben Christopher : calmatters – excerpt

IN SUMMARY

Two consecutive committee chairs getting overruled by their committee members signifies a growing rift among California Democrats about how to address the housing crisis.

One of the most controversial housing bills of the year has lived to be voted upon another day, but only by surviving the Legislative equivalent of two back-to-back prison breaks.

Last week, Senate Bill 79, a bill by San Francisco Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener to boost apartment and commercial construction around major public transportation hubs, passed the Senate Housing Committee over the strenuous objections of its chair, Sen. Aisha Wahab, a fellow Democrat from Fremont.

That was a notable development in its own right. Chairs tend to get their way on the bills that pass through their committees. When a majority of a committee’s members decide to buck legislative decorum and tradition and steamroll that committee’s chair, it’s often taken as a sign that California’s dominant Democrats are unusually divided over an issue; that the issue at hand is especially contentious; that the legislators either aren’t receiving clear guidance from legislative leadership or are willing to ignore that advice; or some combination of all of the above.

Fast forward to this week and it happened again.

In the Senate Local Government Committee, Sen. María Elena Durazo, a Los Angeles Democrat, urged a no vote on Wiener’s bill.

She didn’t get her way. The bill passed with the backing of all the other Democrats on the committee. Durazo voted “no” with the two Republicans.

A chair getting “rolled” is an unusual spectacle in Sacramento. In the typically arcane and perfunctory proceedings of the Legislature, this bit of human drama pops up once or twice a year. For it to happen twice in a row for the same bill is without any obvious precedent.

“Extra unique” is how Chris Micheli, a longtime California lobbyist and public commentator on the Legislative process, described the situation. “Beyond the particular bill at hand, it could give an indication that there is a philosophical split in the caucus.”… (MORE)

Pushback is probably coming from the public that no longer trusts the government that has been running the same scheme for over a decade and still complains and blames everyone else for the lack of housing. The huge number of entitlements cannot be lost of the public. We have a much more neutral media, including CalMatters, to thank for bringing the truth to the public. The obvious is becoming hard to ignore.

Posted on

ABUNDANCE MEETS RESISTANCE: ARE DEMOCRATS FINALLY READY TO GO ALL IN ON BUILDING HOUSING?

By JEANNE KUANG : calmatters – excerpt

Amid a post-2024 wave of Democratic interest in the burgeoning pro-development “abundance” movement, this seemed to be an easy year for California’s yes-in-my-backyard housing development activists.
Democratic leaders in the state Legislature declared their intention to tackle affordability this year. Gov. Gavin Newsom and other politicians have since embraced the “abundance” platform, which argues that Democrats must do more to quickly deliver housing, transportation and other infrastructure projects to their constituents.
Lawmakers have introduced ambitious bills that would, for housing developments in existing neighborhoods, blow a hole through the longstanding thicket of environmental reviews and regulations that often slow down projects and add costs. One of those passed its first committee on Monday.
Still, YIMBY-ism hit a stumbling block Tuesday in the form of the Senate housing committee. The committee, led by Sen. Aisha Wahab, nearly killed a closely watched bill to require cities to allow taller, denser apartments and condo construction near public transit stations.
Wahab said she was acting on a chorus of familiar objections from progressives and others who have long delayed housing construction in California: The legislation didn’t guarantee that projects would be built with union labor. It didn’t require that the new units be affordable for low-income residents. It could infringe on local governments’ ability to block or green-light projects. It opened up the possibility of bypassing certain environmental reviews.
In the end, the committee voted 6-2 against Wahab’s objections to narrowly advance Senate Bill 79, by Sen. Scott Wiener, a San Francisco Democrat and prominent advocate for housing production. Some Democrats were absent or didn’t vote. The committee also killed a different Wiener bill that would have further loosened restrictions on property owners who want to split single-family homes into duplexes. It was a stark reversal from prior years in the Legislature, when Wiener chaired the housing committee and pushed through several bills to spur housing production…
A progressive who is focused on preserving explicitly affordable units for low-income tenants, Wahab, a Hayward Democrat, was pushing for legislation to help cities that enact rent caps compete with other municipalities for state housing and planning grants. Some studies have found rent control in San Francisco has reduced rental supply, while other economists say capping rents is still needed to help those who are housing insecure.
“The state has prioritized development, development, development,” Wahab said. “The types of development that are going up with zero parking and all these giveaways to developers have also not translated to housing that has dignity that people want to stay in and raise their families in.”
Her bill (SB 262) drew skepticism from some colleagues on the committee, who noted the state funding programs are for development and production, but nevertheless voted to advance it… (more)

SB 262: Housing element: prohousing designations: prohousing local policies. https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260sb262

Posted on

SF upzoning could displace small businesses, advocates warn

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

A new front is opening up in the brewing political battle over San Francisco’s still-in-progress plan to upzone large swaths of the west and north of The City.

A coalition of local businesses and progressive advocates is raising the alarm about the possibility that widespread upzoning could result in a large number of mom-and-pop shops getting displaced as looser zoning rules unlock a wave of new residential construction projects.

Such projects often force small businesses to relocate for lengthy periods to make way for demolition or remodeling work, they contend.

“As commercial corridors are upzoned and the value of buildings and parcels in these corridors increase as a result, we anticipate a substantial increase in landlords using these tactics to push long-term community-serving businesses out,” said Justin Dolezal, a co-founder of local advocacy group Small Business Forward.

For the most part, small businesses in San Francisco do not own their own buildings, according to the group. That leaves local establishments — including bars, restaurants, retailers, and nail salons — highly vulnerable when landlords decide to increase rents or simply choose not to renew lease agreements.

Dolezal’s group is making the case that as city leaders consider adopting a new zoning map that would increase height and density limits along dozens of commercial corridors, The City should first put stronger safeguards in place to protect the thousands of small businesses dotting San Francisco’s cityscape.

Local small-business advocates turned out in large numbers during last Thursday’s meeting of the Planning Commission to present their list of proposals, including additional requirements that developers provide financial support to small businesses displaced as a result of building demolitions.

In making the case for such safeguards, they described such small businesses as beloved local institutions that serve as valuable engines of commerce as well as highly prized communal hubs for the neighborhoods they serve… (more)

 

Posted on

Good News out of Sausalito and San Diego

San Diego – Cities Can’t Assume Infill Development Reduces VMT 
By William Fulton – March 30, 2025
CEQA, Infill, San Diego County, SB 743, VMT
In a major opinion that could unravel implementation of SB 743 throughout the state, an  appellate court has ruled that cities and counties can’t assume infill development will  automatically lead to lower vehicle miles traveled.
The case was published and therefore  can be used as precedent around the state…  read more about the case: San-Diego_Infill_VMT_4thAppealsCourt
Posted on

The Average PG&E Utility Bill Has Gone Up Nearly 70% Since 2020

By Matthew Green : kqed – excerpt

The average utility bill for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers increased by about 67% over the last five years, driven in large part by a steep hike in electricity rates.

That’s according to a KQED analysis of PG&E charges, which found that residential ratepayers now pay an average of about $300 a month for their combined gas and electric service, up from $179 in 2020.

Electricity charges, which make up well over half of most ratepayers’ bills, have increased by more than 60% over that time period — from a monthly average of roughly $125 in January 2020 to about $202 in January 2025.

The utility’s gas rates have also risen markedly in recent years, including an additional 8.6% rate increase that went into effect in January.

The increasingly steep cost of keeping the lights on and the heat flowing comes as PG&E last week asked California regulators if it could increase the rate of return for its investors, to 11.3%, up a percentage point from the current limit — a move that would result in yet another rate hike.

If PG&E’s application is approved by the California Public Utilities Commission, the average ratepayer would see an increase of about $5.50 per month, PG&E bistarting in January 2026 at the earliest, according to the utility.

The company said in a statement that it pays the lowest dividend in the utility industry and that the increase is needed to attract investors, who provide the upfront capital for crucial system improvements, wildfire mitigation and safety and reliability projects. PG&E is California’s largest utility, serving more than 5 million customers across a 70,000-square-mile service area in Northern and Central California…(more)

Posted on

Letter to the Editor: Plenty of Questions About the New Ocean Beach Park

via email from richmondsunsetnews – excerpt

Editor:

To Mayor Lurie and the Board of Supervisors:

Don’t you think you had better slow down ramming this park idea down our throats and what artwork should be commissioned? The sand, wind, and graffiti will make quick work of destroying whatever you plan to put up. The graffiti on the art sculptures at the end of the Taraval line have had graffiti on them for months. Who’s in charge of cleaning it up?

Who is in charge around here anyway, giving away taxpayer dollars without the community allowed any input? Have other supervisors of the City had any input? Why don’t you use the money to buy art and school supplies for the children and public schools in the City? Our schools are broke, laying off teachers and cutting programs. Trump is talking about cutting off funds that San Francisco and California badly need. This is not a playground for children, it’s for adults who want to see the ocean from their high rise condos. The people backing this are mostly out-of-town millionaires. Their skin in the game is making money.

We already have over 250 parks and playgrounds in the City. Why don’t you paint murals at our schools and playgrounds and better maintain what we already have? The schools are laying off staff, and contemplating closing schools and you folks want to paint murals on the ground and walls next to the sand? Isn’t the purpose of going to the beach, is to go to the beach, lay in the sand and look out at the ocean and watch the waves? Art is nature itself! How many statues and murals do you see when you go to Yosemite or Yellowstone national parks?

I am including all of the supervisors whose areas suffer from a lack of funds in their own areas. SFMTA and Muni are millions of dollars in debt. They are cutting Muni lines, and want to raise parking fees to raise money. Our large and small businesses are leaving. Is it OK for all of you to approve money for art projects, money that we don’t have? How many of you supervisors have had input in this Ocean Beach playground? How many of you know what the city budget is for this two-mile playground? We have a lack of transparency!

Maybe you should have murals of high rise condos painted to match the view looking east.

Friends of Ocean Beach Park have become the Elon Musk of the west side of the City. Like Elon, Friends of Ocean Beach Park are not part of the city government, yet they are out there making decisions for the City. The same with the San Francisco Bike coalition and Walk SF who are funded with taxpayer dollars yet are not part of the city government. It’s rather embarrassing.

Tony Villa, D4 resident

RELATED:
TRUMP, NEWSOM ATTACK CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
protestors are out in force today, March 23, 2025