Category Archives: CA

California’s political hopefuls remain silent on state’s job losses, unemployment

BY DAN WALTERS : calmatters – excerpt

In two months California voters will elect a governor, fill several other statewide offices and choose a new class of state legislators and members of Congress.

The aspirants for those positions are making all sorts of promises to win voters’ approval. But few, if any, have mentioned a slow-motion menace affecting a fundamental facet of life: jobs.

The state has never fully recovered from the virtual shutdown of the economy during the COVID-19 pandemic. It still has more than a million unemployed workers. Its unemployment rate continues to be the highest, or nearly so, of any state. And its signature economic sectors, such as high tech and film production, have been shedding jobs for several years.

As ominous as those data points sound, a deeper dive into employment data reveals an even darker reality.

“California’s labor market is holding up, but its foundations remain troublingly narrow,” Justin Niakamal, research manager at Beacon Economics, said in a recent overview of the state’s economy. Healthcare is the only sector with strong employment gains, he noted…(more)

The Bay Area is ‘exporting’ the housing crisis to the rest of the state, report finds

By

California’s housing crisis is moving inland. 

A new report from the Public Policy Institute of California looks at political opinions across the state. Among the most striking findings: Concern about housing has risen most acutely for residents in the Central Valley and the Shasta regions, as well as, to a lesser extent, larger swaths along the Oregon and Nevada borders.

However, in coastal regions like the Bay Area — which have faced a dire housing crunch for decades — the sense that housing is a paramount problem is actually declining, the researchers found, as people who can afford the region’s high housing costs are increasingly the only ones left living here. 

“The Bay Area has been exporting the (housing) crisis to the interior,” said Eric McGhee, the report’s author.

To come to that conclusion, the researchers used data from their own previous statewide survey, collected from 2016 to 2019, and compared it with answers to the same question about housing asked from 2023 to early this year.

What it revealed is that the share of Bay Area residents who said that housing was a “big problem” declined by about 10 to 15 percentage points compared to nearly a decade ago. But in the Kern region as well as the North Central part of the state, that share increased by more than 20 percentage points.

The findings underscore how the Bay Area’s housing economics and politics have impacts far beyond the region. Those downstream effects are largely driven by people who were priced out of the Bay Area and moved into the more affordable, interior parts of the state, McGhee explained.

That migration in turn pushed prices up in those communities.

Many lower income people in those interior regions were already spending much of their earnings on housing; as Bay Area transplants moved in and further inflated prices, many have been left with little recourse. The areas where concern rose the most are some of the poorest in the state, McGhee said.

“If you’re poor and you’re housing stressed, what are you supposed to do?” he said. In order to avoid ending up on the street, some pile into homes with more people than can comfortably fit. Others simply leave the state

A key difference is that on average, people currently able to afford living in the Bay Area are the least personally affected by the problem, McGhee explained. High housing costs already pushed people who couldn’t afford it out of the region years ago, leaving largely those that could absorb those costs.

According to Census data, renters in the Bay Area are among the least “cost-burdened” by housing, which is defined as spending more than 30% of one’s gross income on rent. In other words, Bay Area residents recognize that housing in the region is a big problem, but for the most part are still here because they can afford it

“The interior can no longer consider itself immune” from the housing crisis, he said…

(more)

California’s clashes over business regulation rage on as legislative session nears end

By Dan Walters : calmatters – excerpt (excerpt)

Back room dealers

Keep an eye on these 5 deals as California lawmakers close out the legislative session

Assembly Bill 2564, carried by Assemblymember Christopher Ward, …would prohibit retailers from engaging in “surveillance pricing,” which is a form of algorithmic pricing in which sellers use personal information to tailor prices to specific consumers….

Assembly Bill 1776, authored by Assemblymember Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, .. would broaden California’s anti-monopoly Cartwright Act, first enacted in 1907 to allow civil or criminal actions against corporations that monopolize markets….is aimed at collusion between two or more corporations to stifle competition and raise prices. But AB 1776 would also sanction actions against corporations that become dominant without colluding….The change was recommended by the California Law Revision Commission to curb monopolistic behavior framers of the original law never envisioned. It is backed by a long list of consumer advocates and unions…

RELATED:
Keep an eye on these 5 deals as California lawmakers close out the legislative session

Who does your representative work for?  How much help are the voters getting and how much help are our elected  representatives selling to the highest bidder?

One of Marin’s biggest new housing projects could get derailed by a lawsuit

By Julie Johnson : sfchronicle – excerpt
The Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary campus in Strawberry is set to be converted into housing. A new legal challenge could derail it.
 

A group of neighbors is challenging Marin County’s approval of a major housing development project on the Tiburon Peninsula, arguing in a lawsuit filed this month that the county was wrong to allow plans to build residences on the slopes of a ridgetop.

The new buildings would be part of a large overhaul of the former Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary campus, a 127-acre site with academic buildings and residences in the unincorporated community of Strawberry covering prime hillsides overlooking the bay.

On June 9, the county approved developer North Coast Land Holdings’ plans to build 337 residential units that would include 70 low-income sites plus a 150-unit residential care facility, a daycare, fitness center and 944 parking spaces. The plans call for demolishing all but 13 existing residences and to preserve open spaces on the property.

But 40 of those market-rate units in 25 buildings are too close to the ridgeline known as Chapel Hill, “effectively blocking views of the Bay from many vantage points,” according to the lawsuit, filed July 6 in Marin County Superior Court by the Strawberry Residents for Sensible Development. The plaintiffs, who are also suing North Coast, argue the county’s decision violated both environmental laws and local plans governing future development… (more)

BUILT ON PROMISES, MANAGED BY CONTRADICTIONS – PRICE OF BEING POOR – PART 9

By Malik Washington : davisvanguard – excerpt

A federally subsidized “showpiece” of San Francisco redevelopment is telling its residents that mold, roaches, ventilation failures and a reported cluster of deaths are their problem – and that their overdue rent is the city’s. Before pouring billions more into Candlestick Point, the City and County of San Francisco owes the public an independent investigation into what has actually happened at Alice Griffith Apartments.

Editor’s note. This article distinguishes among documented facts, publicly reported allegations, and reasonable inferences drawn from the record. It does not accuse the John Stewart Company, McCormack Baron Salazar, the Tabernacle Community Development Corporation, FivePoint, RBC Capital Markets, the San Francisco Housing Authority, the Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure, the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development, or any city official of fraud. It argues that the public record, as it currently stands, justifies an independent fact-finding investigation – and it identifies the specific questions such an investigation should answer.

Editor’s note. This article distinguishes among documented facts, publicly reported allegations, and reasonable inferences drawn from the record. It does not accuse the John Stewart Company, McCormack Baron Salazar, the Tabernacle Community Development Corporation, FivePoint, RBC Capital Markets, the San Francisco Housing Authority, the Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure, the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development, or any city official of fraud. It argues that the public record, as it currently stands, justifies an independent fact-finding investigation – and it identifies the specific questions such an investigation should answer.

One of those tenants, alarmed by the notice they had found waiting for them at the threshold of their own home, contacted this reporter directly. That contact is how this investigation obtained the two notices analyzed in the pages that follow, and how the pattern documented here – a landlord that moves at scale when it is collecting from tenants, and moves slowly, if at all, when tenants are asking it to protect them – came into public view. This reporter has been covering conditions at Alice Griffith Apartments at length in previous installments of “The Price of Being Poor,” published in partnership with The Davis Vanguard. The July 14 door-notice campaign is the newest, and one of the most publicly visible, chapters of that continuing record.

For months before those envelopes went out, residents of the same buildings had been publicly reporting a very different set of grievances: mold, water intrusion, ventilation failures, roach and rodent infestations, broken elevators, malfunctioning fire systems, recent roof concerns, and – most gravely – a reported cluster of approximately ten deaths since January 2026, including community activist Dewayne Gaines. Those grievances have not, to date, produced a comparable operational response from the landlord, from the property manager, or from the City and County of San Francisco… (more)

 

Exclusive: Historic ‘Julia Morgan’ campus to be redeveloped a block from Marina Safeway

By Laura Wasxman : sfchronicle – excerpt

Marina Safeway

A century after the historic Julia Morgan Building opened its doors on the Marina waterfront, the campus surrounding it is preparing for its biggest transformation yet: a redevelopment that would preserve the landmark structure, expand senior housing and bring Sequoia Living in as its nonprofit development partner.

The proposal arrives as another major redevelopment effort just a block away has become one of the neighborhood’s fiercest battles. The contrast between the two projects was on display Thursday evening at Fort Mason, where hundreds of Marina residents gathered to debate the future of the nearby Safeway site on Marina Boulevard, where a plan to add 850 homes has sparked organized opposition…

Residents leading the Safeway opposition said they are not fighting the creation of new homes, but a project they believe does not fit the neighborhood’s scale, character and waterfront setting. Just a block away, the Heritage on the Marina’s proposal for its campus offers a very different model of transformation: preserving the Julia Morgan Building, one of San Francisco’s most significant historic landmarks, while expanding an existing senior care community rather than introducing a new, glass-heavy high-rise residential complex.

Together, the two projects offer a window into a larger question confronting the Marina: What kind of change will the neighborhood accept?…

The Julia Morgan redevelopment plan represents a different kind of transformation.

Heritage on the Marina, the nonprofit that owns and operates the senior living campus, says the redevelopment is intended to modernize aging facilities, expand services for older adults and preserve a piece of San Francisco history.

The centerpiece of the campus is the Julia Morgan Building, a three-story brick landmark completed in 1925 for the San Francisco Ladies’ Protection and Relief Society. Named after California’s first licensed female architect — whose portfolio includes Hearst Castle — the U-shaped building occupies a prominent position on the 1.6-acre site, surrounded by later residential and administrative additions, including health care facilities and a caretaker’s cottage.

The redevelopment plan would preserve the Julia Morgan Building while replacing all other structures with a single, new eight-story residential building. The proposal would increase the campus’s residential capacity from its current level to 122 units while adding modern amenities and care facilities…

Carolyn Kiernat, a principal at Page & Turnbull, the preservation-focused architecture firm working on the restoration and expansion alongside HKIT Architects, said the proposal “carefully balances preservation with progress.”

“Great cities are measured by how well they care for people across every state of life,” said Sara McVey, Sequoia Living’s president and CEO. “The proposed plan preserves an important piece of San Francisco’s history while ensuring it can continue serving older adults and the Marina community for another 100 years.”…

The Julia Morgan campus redevelopment and the Safeway project have become symbols of two competing visions for the Marina’s future. Thursday’s community meeting underscored a growing reality facing neighborhoods across the city: They may have to make room for both. … (more)

 

SANDAG spared 2 North County cities from more aggressive housing development — a move at odds with state guidance

By Lucas Robinson and Madeleine Kashkoolie : sandiegotribune – excerpt

Pro-housing groups say the agency’s decision to not upzone the areas around two transit hubs reeks of political influence.

For months, many North County leaders have criticized and tried to blunt the impacts of a new state law that overrides local zoning to allow high-rise housing near transit stops.

They just got some help in that effort from the San Diego Association of Governments.

In a move that conflicts with state guidance, SANDAG exempted Solana Beach and parts of Oceanside from the most dramatic potential impacts of that law, Senate Bill 79, which took effect at the beginning of July.

On the regional planning agency’s board of directors, North County politicians hold outsized sway — among them Solana Beach Mayor Lesa Heebner, who has chaired the board for a year and a half….

The law allows for buildings up to 95 feet tall within a certain distance of transit stops, even if the area is zoned for single-family housing. It applies within a quarter-mile of all eligible transit stops, but for the busiest ones, it applies to everywhere within a half-mile.

In San Diego, the law could have a greater reach than the city anticipated. Officials had estimated only four bus stops would be subject to new higher-density allowances — but in SANDAG’s maps, 21 meet the criteria…

Yet in Solana Beach and Oceanside, a different story played out.

The area surrounding Solana Beach’s train station, which is serviced by the North County Transit District and Amtrak, is not subject to upzoning, according to the maps.

In Oceanside, the neighborhood around the city’s downtown transit center will see a laxer upzoning designation despite being serviced by four different train lines.

In an interview, Heebner said she gave agency staff no input on how to draft the maps… (more)

The Chron discovers, sort of, that Wiener’s housing bills are a con

By Zelda Bronstein : 48hills – excerpt

Con man Wiener failed to sell SB50 because the men with the money did not believe his claims. Now they just don’t care whether he makes sense or not. He is working for them. Photo by sfbluecomics.

Finally, a story that mentions the real issue: Cities can’t force developers to build

In countless editorials and news stories, the San Francisco Chronicle has championed state Sen. Scott Wiener’s claims that city Nimbyism is the major culprit in California’s housing crisis, and that his legislation has finally brought growth-resistant local governments to heel.

California cities, for their part, have argued that Wiener’s legislation penalizes them for something they can’t control: developers’ willingness to build.

Given the Chronicle’s anti-city line, it was surprising to find the cities’ complaint reinforced by an article the paper ran on July 5. To be sure, that corroboration appears at the very end of the story and doesn’t mention Wiener. Moreover, the headline—“These Bay Area suburbs are the furthest behind on their housing goals”—suggests that, as ever, cities are to blame.

The piece is a bit confusing, because it considers two related but different sorts of local housing goals set by the state. Reporter Olivia Borgula briefly discusses the requirement that cities’ general plans include a housing element that’s certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Lack of certification triggers the “Builders Remedy,” which allows developers to do pretty much anything they want.

But Borgula’s main focus, and mine here as well, is on the state’s requirement that each city issue a certain of number housing permits or be forced to “streamline” (a euphemism for approval without a public hearing) certain housing projects. The required number of permits corresponds to each city’s “Regional Housing Need Allocation” or RHNA (sounds like ree-nuh)…

Behind the enormous RHNAs: Wiener’s bills…

The Chronicle’s unexpected exposé

Borgula concludes by citing David Garcia, deputy director of policy at the state Legislature’s go-to consultancy, UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation:

Garcia said the number of homes permitted in a city largely depends on the area’s economics, including construction costs and the availability of subsidies for low-income housing.

“A city can have a perfectly good housing element, perfectly good zoning, all geared toward getting housing built, but if the market is not really working for developers, then that stuff just doesn’t get built,” he said…(more)

 

 

California becomes the first state to launch a tool to monitor and track artificial intelligence’s impacts on the workforce

Governor Newsom  News

California AI-Unemployment Tracker (CAIT)

“I thank our partners at the California Policy Lab for helping us lead the way.”…

What you need to know: As part of Governor Newsom’s executive order on artificial intelligence (AI) and the workforce, California today introduced a first-in-the-nation online tracking tool to monitor and detect AI-related job loss.

SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the launch of California’s first-in-the-nation tool to proactively track AI-related job loss trends – an early warning system to help the state monitor, track, and anticipate job loss. The dashboard was developed in partnership with the University of California, California Policy Lab and released as part of the Governor’s recent executive order issued to prepare workers, small businesses, and communities for the economic disruption that artificial intelligence will bring.

“California has always been a place that embraces innovation while taking seriously the responsibility that comes with it. We’re shaping the future — and charting the course for the nation. As AI advances, we aren’t just watching from the sidelines; we’re reimagining how we prepare California through strong governance and innovative policy.”… (more)

 

Calif. farmers bulldoze acres of apple trees after Martinelli’s ends contracts

By

FILE: California apple farmers in Watsonville are bulldozing their orchards after Martinelli’s abruptly canceled their contracts. The company will continue to grow and source applies in the Pajaro Valley.

Karell Reader’s heart sank when she saw acres of apple trees piled up on her neighbor’s Watsonville farm last month. Her neighbor used to sell apples to California cider empire S. Martinelli & Company, but he was forced to bulldoze dozens of apple trees after the company canceled his contracts…

Lookout reported that the shift in vendors could be a strategic financial move by Martinelli’s as the company looks to find cheaper apples from out of state. According to the most recent Crop Report for Santa Cruz County, apples cost about $400 per ton in 2024. Comparatively, apples from Washington cost $135 a ton that same year. Farmers also relied on Martinelli’s for labor, equipment and chemicals for pest control, according to the Lookout… (more)

Another loss for California farmers who are operating the most expensive state in the unions. How much more of our state’s agricultural business will be replaced by water and power hungry AI computer centers in the name of progress?