Category Archives: deregulated housing bills

deregulated housing bills, Housing, Planning, Politics

Will The City’s plans to add more homes make housing affordable?

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

San Francisco city leaders are trying to add a lot of new homes to The City in the coming years.

If approved, a proposal to upzone large swaths of The City’s north and west would add enough room for the construction of roughly 36,000 new dwellings.

For upzoning supporters, the hope is that all those added homes will help to bend the housing cost curve in San Francisco, and, eventually, reduce The City’s affordability crisis.

But progressive housing advocates, who have been organizing in opposition to the effort, are pushing back with two questions: What kind of housing will get built? And who will those homes be for?…

Those who look more favorably on market-rate developments are making the case that when it comes to new housing, a rising development tide lifts all renters.

“We have both data and anecdotal evidence that shows when we have an increase in housing supply, that helps open up more opportunities,” across the income spectrum, said Jane Natoli, San Francisco organizing director for YIMBY Action… (more)

We have heard all the arguments on both sides, but, no one has seen any of the data or evidence that Jane Natoli claims is out there. And believe me, people have looked for it. There is some evidence that distressing commercial zones by inflicting traffic and parking limitations and allowing anti-social behavior to invade a neighborhood will take a toll on the local tax base. It is hard to miss the damage done to the Market and Van Ness neighborhoods. Those empty office and commercial buildings do not give any credence to the supply and demand in housing supply argument. Please Ms. Natoli, show us your data. Where has added housing stock of the stack and pack variety lowered rents? We see a lot of empty units but not a huge drop in rents. We also see a huge demand for reduced tax assessments and other unintended consequences.

CEQA, deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics

This rich beachfront city is trying to launch an anti-housing insurgency in California

Bay Sara Libby : sfchronicle – excerpt (audio)

California Gov. Gavin Newsom stays famously tight-lipped about bills making their way through the state Legislature. So it was a surprise this week when he not only endorsed two bills to slash local restrictions that can hold up housing construction — he said he would leapfrog lawmakers altogether and implement them through the budget.

Newsom was not subtle about where he believes the fault for the housing crisis lies: “It is not the state of California that remains the biggest impediment. The obstacle remains at the local level.”

His comments incensed the California League of Cities, which argued, “California cities are not the obstacle.”

But just hours later, a city on the California coast set out to prove Newsom right.

Cheered on by constituents, the City Council of Encinitas, just north of San Diego, voted on Wednesday to support a prospective ballot measure that would amend California’s Constitution by handing control over housing back to localities…

On Wednesday, [Mayor Bruce] Ehlers, [Encinitas City Council Member Luke Shaffer] Shaffer and their colleagues backed the resolution to support a potential statewide ballot measure that would amend California’s Constitution and hand control over housing back to localities…(more)

RELATED:

Does building homes lead to lower housing costs? New research is roiling the debate

The question no one has answered yet, is why, if the state has been writing density bills and developers have been building dense housing for decades, why have the housing prices gone up instead of down? Where are the studies that prove building dense housing has lowered housing prices anywhere?

100’s of California cities are fighting the state’s ferocious appetite for power that has been carving out a larger role for itself while handing the local communities and their citizens the bills for increased infrastructure bills that used to go to developers.

The state claims the cities can raise the funds by raising taxes to pay for growth they demand and nobody wants. That is not a winning argument yet, the YIMBY keep peddling it.

It gets better. Newsom and Wienerites are now tipping their toes in the Maga sea of inequities by cutting off social services and tearing the safety nets they once built. How is this going to play among what is left of the Democratic Party they want to lead in Washington?

 

 

 

 

CEQA, deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics

Wiener SB 677 is dead for now. Let’s keep it buried.

via email

On April 22, 2025, SB 677 did not advance in the Senate Housing Committee, failing by a narrow 4-3 vote. Despite this setback, Senator Wiener claims he will continue working on the bill.

This is one of the two signature bills he hoped to pass this legislative cycle with SB 79 as the other.  This is not a mortal wound, but  certainly a setback to his typically unchallenged power.  Let’s keep working on SB 79 – killing that bill will cripple him further especially with his sights turning to run for another State office.

Key Provisions of SB 677

Enhancements to SB 9 (Small-Scale Housing)

  • Mandatory Ministerial Approval: Requires local governments to approve housing developments with up to two units on lots zoned for single-family or up to four units, removing discretionary review processes. ​LegiScan+2FindHOALaw+2BillTrack50+2

  • Elimination of Owner-Occupancy Requirements: Removes the mandate for applicants to reside in one of the units, facilitating broader participation in housing development. ​LegiScan

  • Override of HOA and CC&R Restrictions: Invalidates homeowners association rules and covenants that prohibit or unreasonably restrict such developments. ​Senator Scott Wiener+2FindHOALaw+2LegiScan+2

  • Increased Minimum Unit Size: Raises the minimum allowable unit size from 800 to 1,750 net habitable square feet, promoting more livable housing options. ​Terner Center+5LegiScan+5Digital Democracy | CalMatters+5

  • Simplified Urban Lot Splits: Removes previous constraints, such as the 40% minimum parcel size and limitations on prior subdivisions, to ease the process of lot splitting. ​BillTrack50+1California YIMBY+1

  • Impact Fee Exemptions: Prohibits local agencies from imposing impact fees on housing units smaller than 1,750 square feet and mandates proportional fees for larger units. ​LegiScan+1Digital Democracy | CalMatters+1

Modifications to SB 423 (Streamlined Multifamily Housing)

  • Reduced Affordable Housing Requirement: Lowers the inclusionary housing requirement from 50% to 20% for jurisdictions that have met their market-rate housing goals but not their affordable housing targets. ​Terner Center+1Senator Scott Wiener+1

  • More Frequent RHNA Assessments: Changes the evaluation frequency of Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) compliance from every four years to every two years, enabling quicker identification of housing shortfalls.​BillTrack50+4Senator Scott Wiener+4LegiScan+4

  • Shifted Burden of Proof: Places the responsibility on local governments to provide evidence when denying developments based on environmental criteria, aiming to prevent misuse of environmental regulations to block housing projects. ​LegiScan+2Senator Scott Wiener+2Digital Democracy | CalMatters+2

Additional Provisions:

  • Coastal Zone Considerations: Clarifies that while developments in coastal zones must still obtain coastal development permits, local agencies are not required to hold public hearings for these applications, streamlining the approval process. ​Digital Democracy | CalMatters+1LegiScan+1

  • State Oversight of Local Ordinances: Mandates that local governments submit any new ordinances related to SB 9 to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days, allowing the department to review and ensure compliance with state housing laws. ​Terner Center 
    Is this even Constitutional or should it be?

     

CEQA, deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics

Latest CEQA reform effort a ‘major needle-mover,’ some housing advocates say

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt (audio)

Which way are they going now?

Some San Francisco housing advocates are cheering the latest push to reform California’s environmental review standards.

State Sen. Scott Wiener, who represents San Francisco, has put forward a bill — SB 607 — that would make a number of highly technical changes aimed at narrowing the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act, a decades-old environmental law that critics say has been harnessed to block all manner of projects throughout the state…

Wiener’s bill targets the rollback of CEQA’s reviews only to cover “environmentally friendly and environmentally neutral projects,” according to a press release from his office…

“It rips the heart out of CEQA,” said Richard Drury, an Oakland-based environmental lawyer who has litigated CEQA cases for decades.

The law — first passed in 1970 — requires studies to determine the potential environmental impact from projects, including how they could affect air quality, waterways and noise pollution…

“I’m not one of these people who wants to get rid of CEQA,” said Wiener in an interview with The Examiner. “But I want it to be very focused on actually protecting the environment without preventing California from building all of the things that we need to succeed.”… (more)

HOW CAN WE TRUST EITHER PARTY WHEN THEY ARE GOING IN THE SAME CIRCULAR DIRECTION? IS UT A SEE SAW OR MUSICAL CHAIRS?

 

CEQA, deregulated housing bills, Housing

Fwd: San Francisco looks to boost housing after another year of slow growth

By Keith Menconi : sfexaminer – excerpt

San Francisco’s housing growth remained sluggish in 2024, with the number of newly completed homes likely the lowest of any year in at least the past 10 years, according to preliminary figures from city housing officials.
Those numbers seem to continue a yearslong trend of declining housing construction that has persisted despite a furious effort to reform San Francisco’s housing rules and make The City — infamous for its marathon permitting processes that can leave developments in limbo for years — a more hospitable place to build homes.
In the face of continued anemic housing growth, city housing officials, developers and advocates say that they will continue to push for further measures to support new construction…
As for when those efforts will spur the long-hoped for development boom, they acknowledged, it remains impossible to say.
“I think I’m going to be cautiously pessimistic” of what 2025 might bring, said Corey Smith, executive director of the San Francisco-based Housing Action Coalition. It’s one of many pro-development groups that have been making the case that The City must dramatically ramp up its home building efforts if it ever hopes to turn the corner on its affordability crisis.
That measured pessimism is a stark turnaround from Smith’s outlook at the start of 2024, when he said he had hoped new streamlining laws would be enough to help San Francisco’s flagging housing sector overcome the economic disruptions unleashed by the pandemic, including spiraling construction costs and stubbornly high interest rates…

“It costs more to build the building than the building is then worth when it’s completed,” Babsin said.…(more)

This is old news for the most part. Did not realize the value of the finished building is not worth the cost to build it No wonder insurance companies are fleeing. There is no reason to build when businesses are closing and thousands of recently constructed units sit empty. Add the high cost of capital, labor and materials and you have no reason to invest in San Francisco development projects at the moment. No reason for Smith or anyone else to be too hopeful that things will turn around any time soon. Now if people would just quit pretending and lying we could put the constant pressure to produce more housing that no one wants to live in.
CEQA, deregulated housing bills, Planning, Politics

Push to build more homes on California coast stifled after lawmakers derail housing bills

By Ben Christopher : calmatters – excerpt

Several efforts to minimize the power and influence of the California Coastal Commission have stalled…

Housing advocates thought that this was going to be the year when they finally cracked the California Coast.

In early spring, Democratic lawmakers, and the Yes In My Backyard activists backing them, rolled out a series of bills aimed at making it easier to build apartments and accessory dwelling units along California’s highly regulated coast and to make it more difficult for the independent and influential California Coastal Commission to slow or block housing projects. The 15-member group oversees almost all of the state’s 840 miles of coastline, a stretch of land that just under a million Californians call home.

The pro-construction push built off last year’s success for the coalition when the Legislature passed a major housing law and — breaking from long-standing legislative tradition — did not include a carveout for the coast. This year’s pack of bills was meant to cement and build off a new political reality in which the 48-year-old Coastal Commission no longer has quite so much say over housing policy.

Fast forward to mid-August and those new bills are either dead or so severely watered down that they no longer carry the promise of a more built-out coastline. Whatever happened last year, the California Coastal Commission is still a force to be reckoned with…(more)

deregulated housing bills

YIMBYs to California: Drop dead

By Christopher LeGras : allaspectreport – excerpt

Legislature considering a bill that would make it easier for developers to build housing in high fire danger zones

If Senate Bill 610 passes, expect to see a lot more scenes like this throughout California in the coming decades… (more)

NOTE: As of yesterday SB 610 was suspended in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, meaning it will not proceed in this legislative session. However, the facts and background remain highly relevant. There is an excellent chance the bill will be resurrected next year.

deregulated housing bills, Housing

Want property taxes to go up? Why California should reject ballot measure easing bond votes

By Susan Shelley : Newsbreak – excerpt
Stay up-to-date with free briefings on topics that matter to all Californians. Subscribe to CalMatters today for nonprofit news in your inbox.

In November, California voters will decide the fate of Proposition 5, which would make it easier for local governments to borrow money for housing and various public infrastructure projects. Below, a taxpayer watchdog says Prop. 5 will essentially let governments increase property taxes whenever they want. The opposing view: A local mayor says the measure will help public agencies pursue vital projects that can make California more affordable…(more)

deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics, Transportation

Bay Area Housing Finance Authority Pulls Regional Measure 4 from the November Ballot

For Immediate  Release:

San Francisco – This morning, the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) voted to pull Regional Measure 4, the $20 billion dollar regional bond measure, off the November ballot. Gus Mattammal, President of the 20 Billion Reasons campaign to defeat the bond measure in November, hailed the move.

Said Mattammal, “This decision is a win for Bay Area taxpayers, and a win for affordable housing. To address housing affordability in a meaningful way, we have to address root causes, not soak taxpayers for billions of dollars at a time using bonds that would waste two thirds of the revenue on interest and overhead while barely making a dent in the issue.”

The 20 Billion Reasons campaign brought together Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents in a single campaign, a rarity in recent times, but a necessity. Said Mattammal, “Actually working on the root causes of the housing crisis in California, a crisis created by our legislature and the corporate interests to which they are beholden, is politically difficult. It’s much easier to simply raise taxes. That’s why it’s so important for voters to say ‘no’ to deeply flawed proposals such as Regional Measure 4: every time we do say no, it helps create the political conditions to work on the problem in a meaningful way.”

Though Regional Measure 4 is off the ballot for now, many other expensive proposals remain on the ballot, and the $20 Billion Reasons campaign team is excited to regroup and consider the best way forward to help ensure that Bay Area taxpayers are getting real solutions for the taxes they pay.

About Gus Mattammal – Gus is an entrepreneur and educator who has lived and worked in the Bay Area for over 17 years. He is proud to work with the committed Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Independents who seek to ensure that the public’s money is wisely spent. Learn more at: 20billionreasons.com

deregulated housing bills, Housing, Planning, Politics

Housing Bond Issue Draws Fire

By:  independentnews – excerpt (includes audio track)
Housing Bond Issue Draws Fire

Housing Bond Issue Draws Fire

TRI-VALLEY — Thirteen Bay Area residents opposed to a $20 billion regional housing bond measure filed a lawsuit last week that alleges the question to be placed on November ballots as Regional Measure 4 (RM4) is slanted to prejudice voters to approve it.

The group contends the official name of the measure, “Bay Area Affordable Plan,” is deceptive and the ballot question voters will consider contains a series of phrases that are not found in the language of the measure. The residents’ group is asking the court to rename the measure to “Bay Area Affordable Housing Bond,” because they contend it will cost residents more in property taxes.

“This lawsuit is all about the 75 words maximum that will be in the Regional Measure 4 ballot question,” said Jason Bezis, an attorney for the residents, a list of electors for the Nov. 5 election, members of county taxpayers’ associations, and a former San Jose City Council member.

Bezis’ office filed a petition in Santa Clara Superior Court on Aug. 8, demanding it be rewritten. The filing came six days after sending a “pre-litigation” letter to the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA), which placed the measure on the ballot.The lawsuit targets BAHFA and election officials in Alameda, Santa Clara, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Solano, and Sonoma counties, along with the city and county of San Francisco… (more)