Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods
Advocating for a healthy city
Find out what you can do if you object to this plan.
Thursday, April 11, 2024, 6:30-8:30 PM – a live event (Zoom)
Christ Church Lutheran, 1090 Quintara Street
Sunset/Parkside District 4 Town Hall – Up-zoning Plans
Protect Neighborhoods, Support Merchants, Meet Housing Needs
Register – in person* Limited space of 125
Register – via Zoom
By Roland Li : sfchronicle – excerpt
San Francisco’s leaders have spent the past few years desperately trying to figure out how to deal with a glut of empty offices, shuttered retail and public safety concerns plaguing the city’s once vibrant downtown. Now, a California lawmaker wants to try a sweeping plan to revive the city’s core by exempting most new real estate projects from environmental review, potentially quickening development by months or even years.
State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, introduced SB1227 on Friday as a proposal to exempt downtown projects from the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, for a decade. The 1970 landmark law requires studies of a project’s expected impact on air, water, noise and other areas, but Wiener said it has been abused to slow down or kill infill development near public transit.
“Downtown San Francisco matters to our city’s future, and it’s struggling — to bring people back, we need to make big changes and have open minds,” Wiener said in a statement. “That starts with remodeling, converting, or even replacing buildings that may have become outdated and that simply aren’t going to succeed going forward.”
Eligible projects would include academic institutions, sports facilities, mixed-use projects including housing, biotech labs, offices, public works and even smaller changes such as modifying an existing building’s exterior. The city’s existing zoning and permit requirements would remain intact…
Wiener said he agreed that CEQA provided important oversight but that downtown’s “concrete jungle” was different than more environmentally sensitive areas…
Wiener is also the author of SB969, which would allow alcohol to be served outdoors in designated downtown “entertainment zones.” Wiener’s SB886, in 2022, exempted university student housing projects from CEQA if they met similar requirements such as being near public transit and did not demolish rental housing. Wiener has also proposed SB951 this year to ease the Coastal Commission’s housing oversight in San Francisco.
Wiener has passed a long list of state laws meant to spur more housing construction, particularly in dense urban areas with access to transit. He has also zeroed in specifically on San Francisco’s housing crisis before, including last year when he passed a bill that requires cities behind on their state housing goals to streamline approval of some projects, including an amendment singling out San Francisco for more frequent assessments of its compliance.
… (more)
Scott takes another jab at San Francisco that he claims does not remove local control in one of the densest neighborhoods, because he can? His opponents are looking good these days. Scott needs to pay for all his unfunded mandates and do something about the high cost of living like supporting AB 1999 to cut utility bills. The exorbitant rents and ridiculous costs of operation a business downtown is what cleared the offices. Removing cars and parking did not help either.
By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt
The infamous tower that nobody likes
State Sen. Scott Wiener, in a move that makes very little policy sense, is trying to exempt San Francisco’s oceanfront areas from the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission.
On the surface, it’s a solution in search of a problem: The commission’s oversight powers are very limited, and only cover a tiny sliver of developable land on the Western edge of the city.
In the 51 years since the voters approved the commission, there have been only two instances when someone has appealed a development decision on the San Francisco coast—and both times, the commission denied the appeal…
Wiener’s bill, SB 951, would “remove urbanized San Francisco from the Coastal Zone — while retaining coastal natural resources in the zone — and refine the role of the coastal commission in housing approvals under certain circumstances.”…
“The Coastal Commission is the first pre-emption of local government land-use authority,” Sup. Aaron Peskin told me. “Wiener can’t have it both ways.”…
In fact, Peskin has introduced a resolution opposing the bill, and already has five co-sponsors.
“This is a naked power grab,”…
In addition to sending out odd press releases, Scott has a way to attacking his constituents during an election campaign that makes one wonder how much he really wants to continue in his position. There are three other candidates who so far have not threatened to squash San Francisco under the kind of loads Mr. Wiener is threatening to lower on us.
Only if you failed to witness the latest Scott Wiener attack via phone comments at the latest Coastal Commission Meeting, where he practically screamed at the Commissioners accusing them of holding up a project on the beach for 9 years. According to the Commissioners, he was mistaken and another organization help the project up for 9 years. They turned it around in 5 months once they were handed the documents they needed to proceed.
Details and links to the California Coastal Commission meeting are here:
https://csfn.net/index.php/2024/01/25/wiener-called-out-by-coastal-commissioners/One wonders how relevant this is to a similar encroachment on the Marina Green by Rec and Park that is under scrutiny now by the citizens and the Board of Supervisors. Does the state want to hand over our entire coastline to the Developers to do what they will with it? More on that here:
Ordinance # 231191 – Implementation of Gashouse Cove Project – Marina Yacht Harbor and oppose the plans proposed by San Francisco Rec & Park. Already two petitions have generated thousands of letters and neighborhood groups are living up to protest these projects. Add your voice.
In addition to his anti-constituent anti-build opponents, Wiener has now managed to piss off a lot of his YIMBY followers by attacking what is left of the streets of San Francisco. The anti-car brigade is out of control and has gone too far for many of his former fans. SFMTA pretty much killed downtown San Francisco by removing traffic and parking and now they are attacking our neighborhood businesses by destroying the roads from Valencia to Taraval. People are crying ENUF ALREADY.
By Sarah Klearman, Staff Reporter, San Francisco Business Times : via email – excerpt
San Francisco is back in California’s good graces.
The city is now officially compliant with state housing law, according to a letter sent to San Francisco planning officials by the state department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Jan. 16. San Francisco fell out of compliance at the end of last year after it failed to accomplish a handful of state-mandated changes to the way it approves and permits new housing by a late November deadline.
Each of the changes the city failed to implement – part of a longer to-do list handed to San Francisco as part of a state investigation into why the city’s timelines for approving and building new housing are the longest of any jurisdiction in California — were tied to the passage of San Francisco Mayor London Breed’s constraints reduction ordinance. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors failed to pass the legislation, meant to ease the process of building new housing in San Francisco, by the November deadline.
The state gave San Francisco 30 days – until the end of December — to pass the ordinance and subsequently prove to HCD it had taken all necessary steps to comply with state housing law. Failure to do so would have made the city susceptible to punitive measures like loss of its ability to enforce local zoning codes, a measure known as the builder’s remedy, as well as loss of eligibility for certain kinds of state funding.
The Board of Supervisors ultimately passed the constraints reduction ordinance in December. But they did so with several modifications to the ordinance, even as HCD had repeatedly encouraged the board to pass the ordinance exactly as it was authored by Breed.
After roughly a week of review, HCD confirmed ahead of the December deadline that the modified ordinance met its standards, positioning San Francisco to return to compliance with state housing law. David Zisser, who heads HCD’s housing accountability unit, said in December the department needed a letter from the city describing the actions it had taken to come back into compliance before it could give San Francisco the all clear.
The Jan. 16 letter cements the OK for San Francisco, meaning the city will dodge the punishments that await California jurisdictions that fall out of compliance with California housing law…
HCD, which has taken a keen interest in San Francisco, assigned the city a list of 18 total action items last October as part of the conclusion of its more than year-long study into how the city approves and builds new housing. The first of the items were due in late November; an additional tranche were due Jan. 1. San Francisco Planning Director Rich Hillis told the Business Times at the beginning of January the city had accomplished those items before the Jan. 1 deadline.
Additional action items are due in coming weeks…(more)
For the full list of action items and deadlines assigned to the city by HCD, contact HCD. Thanks to a friend we got the information in the article, which raises a few good questions for the officials at the Affordable Housing discussions.
By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt
This 50 story tower planned for 2700 Sloat next to a half-empty brand new housing complex is being blamed on Scott Wiener. He is up for re-election and opposed by three people so far: Cynthia Cravens (D), Yvette Corkrean (R), and Jingchao Xiong (recent immigrant form China)
Demolitions. Displacement. And zero new affordable housing. That’s the bill the state senator got passed, and the supes have to deal with it this week.
On KQED news Sunday night, a reporter announced that “housing advocates” in San Francisco were pushing the Board of Supes to approve the mayor’s housing legislation this week.
The reporter quoted one person, from Habitat for Humanity, which is a fine organization but has never been involved in local housing politics and isn’t a member of the Council of Community Housing Organizations, which has serious problems with the bill.
Nobody from CCHO, from the Race and Equity in All Planning Coalition, or from the Anti-Displacement Coalition, made the cut…
In all of the news media coverage about the issue, there’s been little discussion about the role Wiener has played in essentially screwing his own city. But the Wiener bill, and the Newsom administration, with the apparent support of Breed, are pushing toward the point where developers will have what’s called the “builder’s remedy,” which means anyone can build anything they want, including demolishing existing rent-controlled housing, without any public input.
Breed, with the support of almost all of the local news media, is trying to blame the supes for delaying or seeking to amend her legislation. And if the supes don’t go along with everything the state is asking for, the Yimbys and the mayor will blame them when a 50-story tower that Wiener and the Breed Administration say they oppose starts construction near Ocean Beach…(more)
This is literally a case of convicted felons moving into San Francisco to take over our beachside community. (Details on sonsf.org)
KQED has lost its local charm and the respect from the community they seek to serve. They bought the “build the perfect place” Kool-Aide and spent a bundle on their new digs. Their funding and programming are suffering. Too bad they did not take a serious stab at a real discussion about the state bills that are pushing homeowners and many others to new levels of anger and disgust with Sacramento politicians. When they open their mouths words come out but the meaning is not there.
By Joe Garofoli : sfchronicle – excerpt
The next four months will go a long way toward determining whether London Breed will continue to be San Francisco’s mayor.
The clock starts ticking this week, when the APEC conference — an international gathering attracting President Biden, doom loop-curious international journalists and scores of protesters — puts San Francisco and all its ills and joys under the microscope.
But that is only the first test Breed will face. The election isn’t until November 2024, but we will know how vulnerable Breed will be by spring, thanks to a timeline that the mayor set in place for herself…
“If it was my candidate and I staked a lot of money and my candidate’s credibility on these ballot measures and they go down, then you have to throw your hands up and say, ‘This is not for me this time,’ ” said Jim Stearns, a longtime San Francisco Democratic consultant.
Even if just one measure loses, Stearns said, “that means that she will have spent a lot of political capital and won’t have moved the needle” on what voters think about her. That makes the ballot measure move “a kind of win-at-all costs strategy for them.”
Yes, for two decades Stearns has advised Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, who will be closely watching March’s results to see whether they give him a reason to jump in and provide a progressive voice in the race. For now, Stearns said, “I don’t have the green light from him that’s happening.”
Meanwhile, tying yourself to ballot measures comes with risks for Breed…
Breed hopes to bask in the reflected glow of these ballot measures, and wow, does she need their positivity. Only 32% of respondents to a September survey from the moderate GrowSF advocacy organization approve of the job she’s doing.
Worse: 68% of respondents felt that San Francisco is going in the wrong direction. That’s a political doom loop for any incumbent…
I don’t know if those (ballot measures) are going to offer quick change,” said Kanishka Cheng, CEO of Together SF Action, a moderate political advocacy organization that has not taken a position on the measures yet. “The public is sort of out of patience. So if they approve things in March, and they don’t see results by November, I don’t think they’ll have much patience left.”…(more)
You cannot play the blame game forever. The media and the political wags are hot on the trail. Either someone is done or it isn’t. The voters will not be easy to fool. The real question is who is going to run for state offices. Not a lot of options on those postions yet.
By Shreya Agrawal : Calmatters – excerpt (includes audio track)
IN SUMMARY: California cities can ban synthetic turf under a law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed. He rejected a bill to ban PFAS in fake lawns.
Gov. Gavin Newsom last week passed on a chance to limit the use of the so-called “forever chemicals” in legions of plastic products when he vetoed a bill that would have banned them in synthetic lawns.
His veto of an environmental bill that overwhelmingly passed the Legislature underscores California’s convoluted guidance on the plastic turf that some homeowners, schools and businesses use in place of grass in a state accustomed to drought.
Less than a decade ago then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law prohibiting cities and counties from banning synthetic grass. At the time, the state was in the middle of a crippling drought and fake lawns were thought to be helpful in saving water…(more)
Money Money Money as High as your eye can see!
City and Supervisor Engardio claim the project is a no go on San Francisco Beach. Petition against skyscraper in SF’s Sunset District draws over 2,500 signatures. Planning Department will hear the matter on July 26. One other issue that has been raised is over who is behind the caper.
By Joe Kukurta wrote in sfist, ” There are other things that smell funny about this proposal. CH Planning “project consultant” John Hickey, the wife of listed developer Raelynn Hickey, was convicted on securities fraud and mail fraud charges in 2006. Plus, YIMBY Law executive director Sonja Trauss has been doing a full-court press giving interviews on behalf of this project. That indicates this whole scheme may be a ruse to create Housing Element-related lawsuits, albeit lawsuits that could push the Overton window of San Francisco height limits up a little more. And that would benefit real estate developers pretty much across the board.… (more)”
By Sarah Wright : sfstandard – excerpt
Despite a massive budget deficit, California won’t cut funding for homelessness programs but sent a clear message to cities like San Francisco: Use it wisely, or else.
“People are dying in the streets in the name of compassion,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said at a press conference on Tuesday morning, a statement echoed by his Deputy Chief of Staff Jason Elliott later in the afternoon.
“At some point, the money can no longer be an excuse for inaction,” Elliott said. “We need to muster the political courage to match that investment.”
On Tuesday, the governor came through with his promise to keep funding the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program, adding $1 billion to the pot after pausing funding late last year as a warning to cities to get serious about getting more people off the streets and into more permanent housing.
But the state doesn’t currently have the tools to do much more enforcement than that…
Though homelessness funding will remain intact, the governor announced $350 million in cuts to housing. Those cuts affect three homeownership programs that provide grants and loans to low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers and support the production of Accessory Dwelling Units… (more)
