Category Archives: Politics

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, 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)

CEQA, Housing, Planning, Politics

Housing Accountability Unit’s Efforts Lead to San Francisco’s Progress in Removing Barriers to Housing Production

Housing Accountability Unit’s Efforts Lead to San Francisco’s Progress in Removing Barriers to Housing Production

San Francisco Has Implemented Key Actions Required by HCD’s Housing Policy and Practice Review

In response to last year’s release of the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) San Francisco Housing Policy and Practice Review (PPR), San Francisco has implemented significant reforms that will make it easier to build housing at all income levels.

The PPR – a first of its kind investigation into a local government’s barriers to housing production – required San Francisco to implement 18 required actions beginning immediately and through 2026 that resolve inconsistencies with state law, accelerate housing production, and reduce barriers beyond the strong commitments already being made through San Francisco’s 6th Cycle Housing Element.

Since the release of the PPR, HCD has continuously monitored San Francisco’s progress. As a result of this technical assistance from HCD and San Francisco’s actions, they are currently up to date on required actions and, in some cases, implementing actions ahead of schedule. The PPR accelerated the passage of reforms already underway and supported the early completion of several actions proposed in San Francisco’s Housing Element.

These policy and practice changes can now begin to translate into real impact and results for development in San Francisco.

Some of the most significant reforms San Francisco has made to address their required actions include:

  • Approving the Constraints Reduction Ordinance, which was proposed shortly after the adoption of the Housing Element and was passed following HCD technical assistance
  • Prohibiting subjectivity in planning approval
  • Reforming CEQA processes to give a clear determination within 30 days of a complete application
  • Increasing objectivity and transparency in the construction permittingprocess
  • Restructuring processes so that developments that already received planning approval cannot be subject to subsequent building permit appeals
  • Reducing procedural hurdles for code-compliant projects
  • Removing hearing requirements for most State Density Bonus Law requests.

Together, these actions help cut red tape and uncertainty, clarify opaque processes, and ensure compliance with state housing laws. For a more detailed summary of these actions, click here.

These changes represent important steps in the right direction and reflect a commitment to achieving a new status quo in San Francisco. Nevertheless, to ensure full implementation of the actions in both the PPR and the housing element – and to achieve housing production in San Francisco that truly meets the need – HCD will continue to provide ongoing support and monitor San Francisco’s progress on their 6 remaining PPR actions as they come due.

By staying on track with these remaining items, San Francisco will continue to demonstrate its commitment to facilitating housing production at all income levels and ensure compliance with its obligations.

Questions? Email PPR@hcd.ca.gov.

Housing, Politics

Canada’s CMHC Internal Messages Show Housing Supply Narrative Is BS

By Stephen Punwasi : betterdwelling – excerpt

Everyone in Canada will soon be able to afford a home. We just need investors to build more and rates to be cut, right? Anyone that can do basic math has probably been skeptical of that narrative and with good reason—even the people making those statements don’t believe it. Internal messages from the CMHC make very brief but important notes that challenge the exact narrative its leadership has been publicly spinning. More supply won’t bring down home prices, and lower rates won’t make them more affordable. Higher prices will make more supply feasible and lower rates will help boost prices.

CMHC Internal Chats Claim Higher Prices Will Improve Supply: The public is frequently told that housing is expensive because of a shortage. People will often say, “it’s simple supply and demand.” Messages shared between the agency’s communications staff and economists in 2021 show the circumstances are a little more complicated.

“Higher price level will improve development feasibility, so starts will remain elevated over the forecast horizon,” read a suggested point discussing a released forecast…

Central Banks Lower Rates To Raise Prices, Not Improve Affordabilty: Understanding how interest rates work also provides a little more context in this area. The Bank of Canada (BoC) is in charge of maintaining an ideal decay in the value of money (i.e. inflation). Their primary and most important tool to do this are interest rates…

CMHC Attributes Higher Prices To Cheap Mortgages In Passing: Higher prices are often blamed on population growth, especially in Canada with its recent record surge since 2022. Home prices made a record move in January 2022, but 2021 was the lowest annual population growth for the country going back to at least the 1970s. That was also the year Canada was completing 18 homes per person the population grew by. …(more)

Stephen Punwasi: Co-Founder and chief data nerd at Better Dwelling. Named a top influencer in finance and risk by Thomson-Reuters.

The more we hear about YIMBY economic theories they more evidence we find that they do not pan out as promised.

CEQA, Politics, Transportation

The new road rage: ‘Disrespect’ to drivers fuels an angry political movement

By Han Lee : sfstandard – excerpt

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

State assembly candidate Manuel Noris-Barrera was among a number of candidates who spoke in opposition to the initiative before joining the car parade to protest the ballot measure proposed by Supervisors Joel Engardio, that would permanently close the Great Highway to cars. The event was organized by the Chinese Community that has been overwhelmed by street project and parking restrictions all over the city

It was a chilly, windy Thursday morning — good weather for getting mad. Denise Selleck drove to a parking lot near Ocean Beach to meet up with other motorists who had gathered to fume before forming a protest caravan that would take over the Great Highway.

Selleck was one of dozens of protesters opposing the potential permanent closure of the Great Highway and its transformation into a park. Located on the west end of the Outer Sunset, the coastal road is open to cars during weekdays and closed on weekends.

“I’ve never felt as dismissed and disrespected as I did,” Selleck, a 67-year-old retired teacher at City College, told The Standard. She said keeping the Great Highway open to cars is safer than rerouting them to other roads in the Sunset. ..(more)

RELATED:

Seven-story building on the Great Highway to house homeless people. Neighbors are pissed

Chinatown merchants say parking restrictions hurt businesses.

Chinatown leaders say bike-lane idea ‘blindsided’ them

Voters feel that SFMTA and Rec and Park projects that re-direct traffic are  largely to blame for SFMTA’s financial woes. Everything they do to diminish traffic on major thorough-fares creates a need to spend more money on mitigations on the side streets that would be not be necessary if SFMTA just managed MUNI instead of working to remove cars.

As the streets become more difficult to navigate residents and businesses leave. The destroy to “build back better” theme has lost whatever luster it once had. City Hall needs to stop the destruction and maintain what is left for those who are still here.

The Chinese community leaders and merchants have so far taken a lead in the fight to keep the Great Highway open. They have been  battling for parking in Chinatown. And now they are being threatened by bike lanes.

We expect many more to follow if Engardio does not withdraw his ballot initiative.

CEQA, Housing, Politics

The Appeal on AB 9

By Ella Morner-Ritt and Alexandra Friedman : cp-dr – excerpt

CP&DR News Briefs: https://cp-dr.com/articles/cpdr-news-briefs-july-16-2024

CP&DR News Briefs July 16, 2024: AB 9 Appeal; Land Use Ballot Propositions; SB 423 Streamlining; and More

By Ella Morner-Ritt and Alexandra Friedman

July 16, 2024

Bonta Appeals Ruling Exempting Charter Cities from SB 9
Attorney General Rob Bonta is appealing a Superior Court decision that halted the enforcement of Senate Bill 9 in charter cities. SB 9 took effect in 2023, allowing subdivision of parcels traditionally zoned for single-family homes into configurations accommodating duplexes and fourplexes. The law faced opposition five charter cities asserting it improperly overrides local zoning in charter cities, though supporters argue it’s crucial for addressing the statewide housing crisis. Del Mar, along with four Los Angeles County cities, challenged SB 9 in court, contending it violates the state constitution by not effectively promoting affordable housing without interfering excessively with local government. The judge’s ruling sided with this argument on April 22, prompting Bonta’s appeal, aiming to clarify the law’s applicability across all of California’s charter cities. Bonta emphasized SB 9’s constitutionality and its role in enhancing housing availability and affordability statewide, highlighting ongoing efforts to defend legislative housing initiatives in court. “We firmly believe that SB 9 is constitutional as to every city in the state,” said Bonta, in a statement. “As the California Second District Court of Appeal recently held, ensuring housing availability and affordability in California is a matter of statewide importance.”

November Statewide Ballot to Feature Four Land Use Propositions
California voters will face four statewide ballot propositions related to land use this November, covering issues from infrastructure funding to rent control. The ballot will feature ten propositions in total. Proposition 2 proposes a $10 billion bond primarily allocated for school construction and upgrades. Proposition 4 proposes a $10 billion bond to fund climate and environmental projects, aiming to mitigate impacts of climate change and bolster water and wildfire defenses. Proposition 5 seeks to ease voter approval requirements for local housing and infrastructure bonds to encourage borrowing for low-income and affordable housing projects. Proposition 33 proposes granting local governments authority to enforce rent control measures; it’s the latest in a string of thus-far unsuccessful rent control measures sponsored by Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation. AB1657 — which proposed issuing $10 billion in general obligation bonds to fund affordable rental housing programs for lower-income families, supportive housing for the homeless and other critical housing initiatives — will not appear on the ballot; concerned about the state’s borrowing capacity, the legislature opted instead for Proposition 2, a $10 billion school facilities bond measure… (more)

deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics

‘Everything rests on this’: Will taxpayers loan Bay Area counties $20B to fix housing?

By Kevin V. Nguyen : sfstandard – excerpt

They want us to pay for our own displacement is they plow down our homes to make room for the millions they claim need housing, in spite of the loss of population in the state.

Voters will decide on this massive new IOU in this upcoming November election

With state and federal funds drying up, banks lending less, and more cities facing budget deficits, tens of thousands of newly proposed affordable homes have been stuck in limbo, unable to get off the ground.

So come this November, Bay Area voters will not only be weighing in on the next U.S. President, but also, whether or not they should step in and loan the nine-county region a total of $20 billion to move those efforts along.

Last week, the commissioners of the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority—a first-of-its kind agency created in 2020—voted unanimously to put the bond measure on ballots to fund new subsidized housing projects, buy up existing homes to make or keep them affordable, and support housing-related infrastructure…

The bond would be funded by property tax increases, with an estimated tax of $19 per $100,000 of assessed value, which shakes out to about $190 per year for a home assessed at $1 million.

If voters approve this IOU, each city would receive a cut of the proceeds based on how much its jurisdiction pays in taxes. San Francisco, for example, would get about $2.4 billion to invest, while the city of Oakland would get over $720 million. The funds would be dispersed in the form of low-cost loans.

BAHFA estimates that paying off the loan would add up to nearly $50 billion after interest. The mayors of San Francisco, San Jose and Oakland all expressed support for the bond measure. …(more)

The MTC who can’t make the trains run on time and splurges on a multi billion dollar building in San Francisco, a the tax payers expense, not wants to sell us on a housing plan that is wants to charge us for by raising property taxes. At a time when property values are receding like yesterday’s tide.

Already people who bought into the ADU concept are shocked by their higher taxes, due to the recent rise in valuation of their property. How many property owners are willing to eat the higher taxes without passing their onto their tenants? Seriously? We are going to trust the MTC with more money when they are refusing to listen to us?

These are the people who removed single family housing from the state, killed the solar industry, want to remove our private vehicles and replace gas stoves with electric that will run on nuclear power and whatever else Big Energy can find to burn. MTC is trying to force us back into the lifestyle we just pulled ourselves out of. They want us to live in tiny homes and commute to tiny office cubicles to keep their computer vehicles working. They call this backward plan their vision of the future?

This is the anti-farm pro-housing gang that seeks to plow over our farms and ranch to build more housing. Who needs fresh food when you can live in tight close quarters and eat who knows what and look cool toting your life in a bag on the Muni on your way to the Mayor’s latest rave?

Newsom is moving this family to Marin but, they will not be living in one of those little units next to the 101 Smart Train station in San Rafael. They will be living on acreage and saving for their children’s future by building equity in their homes. What will we get? Another day older and a another month’s rent.

Politics

Silicon Valley politicians give back donations following FBI raids

by Vicente Vera, Silicon Valley Spotlight : kqed – expert

Recent FBI raids into Bay Area properties owned and run by members of the politically-connected Duong family bring to light the yearslong allegations of illegal political donations into Silicon Valley.

Among those alleged to have received illegal donations are Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, whose residence was searched by federal agents last week in connection with an undisclosed investigation. San José Spotlight found David Duong, CEO of California Waste Solutions, a company contracting with San Jose, and another company leader made contributions to the campaigns of San Jose City Council District 8 candidate Tam Truong and South Bay Congressman Ro Khanna.

Truong’s Campaign Manager Manuel Robles confirmed they received a $700 contribution from Michael Duong, a manager at California Waste Solutions, but the campaign now plans to give the money back.

“Given the news raising questions about these contributions to campaigns throughout the Bay Area and beyond, we are in the process of returning this check,” he told San José Spotlight.

Campaign finance reports show David Duong contributed at least $5,800 to Khanna’s congressional campaign committee last year. Khanna, who represents District 17 in Silicon Valley, said he plans to donate the money.

“We plan to donate the contribution to an organization that is helping people in my district struggling with the rising cost of living highlighted by the Silicon Valley Pain Index report,” Khanna told San José Spotlight.

A California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) report from 2021 alleges David Duong and his son Andy Duong were involved in laundering at least 93 political campaign contributions totaling nearly $76,000. The scheme allegedly resulted in the company reimbursing friends for making political cash contributions to candidates across the state, including the South Bay, on their behalf — an illegal practice that uses “straw donors.”

Jay Wierenga, spokesperson for the FPPC, told San José Spotlight their investigation is still open.

David Duong said California Waste Solutions is aware of federal agents executing search warrants at a number of locations in Oakland related to the company.

“The company is fully cooperating with the government’s investigation, and is confident that the government will conclude that it was not involved in any unlawful or improper activity,” David Duong told San José Spotlight…(more)

It seems like the Duong Bros covered all their bases. No one is left out. Interesting that there is no mention of the Mayor of Oakland whose home was searched, supposedly in connection with the Bros. What does that mean?

deregulated housing bills, Housing, Politics

YIMBY Want to Raise Your Rent

By Marc Salomon : counterpunch – excerpt

Over the past decade, a new political formation has arisen in the US, the YIMBY which stands for “Yes In My Backyard.” YIMBY posit themselves as the antithesis of the NIMBY, “Not In My Backyard,” a constructed political bogey person, who YIMBY claim are responsible for the high cost of housing in the US. Starting in the Bay Area, the YIMBY movement has rapidly expanded to cities nationwide and attracted more funding.

Hardly a spontaneous phenomenon, YIMBY are the latest in a long line of housing and real estate booster political operations that seek favorable regulatory consideration from local governments that have historically regulated land use. From the media campaigns to encourage families to move from the cities to suburban sprawl after WWII to local real estate funded booster organizations that pushed “Transit Oriented Development” in the 2000s, such operators have continually repped for developers. There has always been some background level of pro-development organizing in play…

YIMBY are different, however. As a product of the post-1999/2000 deregulation of Wall Street era, the marriage of funding liberated by deregulation plus a libertarian capitalist housing supply side dogmatism has produced a message that is appealing if only for its simplicity: upzone the cities, deregulate land use approvals, relieve developers of carrying their freight through impact fees and housing prices will fall…

CoreySmith, executive director of the longstanding residential developer booster organization, The Housing Action Coalition, showed YIMBY’s hand at a San Francisco Planning Commission meeting earlier this year:..[when he state] “One of the challenges we face in San Francisco is we need the rent to go back up.”.

It is so refreshing to hear YIMBYs say this stuff out loud. Private developers have no plan for building new housing when rents actually go down. [as they have lately]…

In truth, in order to spur more development, lenders need to see housing prices increase before taking the risk to commit capital to development. Housing production only occurs when housing prices rise. Housing prices only rise during the second half of the up phase of the business cycle when greed eclipses fear.

This shows that the YIMBY are but developer lobbyists who demand housing at all costs, costs which are to be extracted from tenants through higher rents…

There might be good reasons for desirable cities facing torrential demand to entitle some market rate housing. Adding supply to push down price is not one of them. Instead of responding to the flood of shit, YIMBY are best contested by community based grassroots organizing for self determination in comprehensive, not lobbyist directed, land use planning.

The antidote to the shitstorm is “YIMBY want to raise your rents.”

Marc Salomon is a co-founder of the San Francisco Community Land Trust…(more)