Tag Archives: SB 79

Re: SB 79 Amendments as of August 3, 2025

Most cities that opposed SB 79 are not impressed by the latest amendments.  Some legislators may believe that the numerous amendments now make the bill acceptable but most disagree for the following reasons:

Problems with SB 79 that amendments did not fix:

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.

SB 79  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 is unnecessary for cities that already have approved plans to meet their state-mandated housing requirements.

SB 79 needs a 5 year sunset clause.

We need help stopping Senate Bill 79

If you need a visual to understand the impacts of Wiener’s SB 79
The above links to a visual explanation that illustrates the significance of the changes SB 79 could make in your neighborhood.

It took Wiener three rounds of voting to get SB 79 passed in the Senate. It’s amended and scheduled for hearings in the Assembly Housing, Local Government, and Natural Resources committees.
The Housing Committee hearing is in the first week of July;
letters are due June 25th.

If you are concerned about this, consider taking some actions:

See contact info below.  You may call or  leave a message on the phone asking the Assembly members to vote NO on S B 79.
A  spreadsheet of Assemblymembers with contact info

Or send a letter to the Assembly members listed below:

Assembly Members on the Committees 

Text version of a sample letter and speaking points.

I strongly oppose SB 79 as an assault on local control that disregards state-certified housing elements. At first glance, the amendments made by Senator Wiener might appear reasonable, but actually offer nothing of substance.

• The new “affordability” component merely reflects incentives already available.

• The new option for localities to write alternative plans are of no benefit. By requiring that the same number of units and floor area ratio be maintained, this provision is a false alternative, as it merely creates a complex balancing act.

The thrust of SB 79 remains ministerially approved market-rate density without regard to local conditions. Our housing elements have already indicated which sites best serve our communities as infill.

SB 79 is deeply flawed in both concept and consequence. It would inflict disproportionate harm on the most affordable neighborhoods in our cities.

I OPPOSE SB 79 for these reasons:

  • It undermines affordable housing goals
  • 81% of all development under new laws is already market rate
  • It encourages gentrification
  • It undermines the housing element process
  • It does not exempt fire hazard zones
  • Affordable housing near transit is the avowed goal of state policy, but it is not the goal of this bill.

Sincerely,

Individuals: Your name and address
Organizations: Your name, title, and signature; add logo at top

If you want to learn how to post to the portal, go here: https://discoveryink.wordpress.com/ca-legislative-process/ca-bills/posting-letters

MIKE MCGUIRE IN THE HOT SEAT

By Dustin Gardiner and Blake Jones : politico – excerpt

HOUSES DIVIDED

When it comes to housing legislation, Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire has increasingly become the outlier of the proverbial three-legged stool of state government in Sacramento.

His counterparts — Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Gov. Gavin Newsom — have made it abundantly clear this year that they want to go big on measures to accelerate housing construction, including legislation that would slash local restrictions and environmental reviews for new development.

But McGuire has been ambiguous about where he stands on the most high-profile housing legislation this session, including a landmark package of bills to overhaul the California Environmental Quality Act (commonly known as CEQA)…

The governor has also upped the pressure on McGuire in recent days. Last week, Newsom announced that he would seek to advance both major CEQA-reform bills through the state budget — a tactic that would circumvent obstacles like hostile Senate committee chairs. It was a rare foray into the legislative process from Newsom, who typically doesn’t wade into housing fights until legislation is on his desk.

McGuire’s allies in the Senate, including Housing Chair Aisha Wahab, are pushing back against the onslaught facing the pro tem. She has derided the CEQA effort as a developer giveaway that won’t make housing more affordable or stabilize rent increases for tenants…(more)

Comments on the above article:

CALIFORNIA DIVIDED

Politico does not appear to be aware that the disagreements in Sacramento are coming from a growing public outcry against state overreach, as the Sacramento politicians attack CEQA and take what little is left of the voters’ constitutional rights. It started with declaring a housing emergency to, remove local control of land use decisions and has blossomed into something much larger and more sinister.

California Resdients are waking up to a bad dream as they learn what they have lost and what Wiener and Co. plan to take next. It was easy to slip land use laws that don’t take effect for years through the state system, but when you start enforcing new parking and traffic regulations, removing access to roads and public areas, and threatening to install congestion pricing the public takes notice and objects vehemently.  When they learn about the gas taxes and plans to raise utility rates, and kill solar contracts, they become even less submissive and start to take radical actions.

Wiener is not the only problem. 2025 has been an uneasy year for a number of reasons. The focus on Washington is wearing thin, and as California residents find themselves on the hot seat for a number of supposed sins that they did not commit or condone, they are angry and seeking answers. Governor Newsom’s reaction is to blame anyone else, but, that is not working.

The governor’s erratic response to social issues is not winning any friends either, and his power plays are becoming overly aggressive and distasteful to many in his party, a fact the national press has not picked up on or ignored. The split they think they see inside the walls of Sacramento is much wider among the disenfranchised California voters.

THE CALIFORNIA LAND GRAB 

There are so many bills being written every year by outside interests that are pushed onto our state representatives that no one, including those state representatives, have  time to read them all. A few really bad bills have caught our attention. Two being heavily  opposed right now are SB 79 and SB 607, both state land grab bills that remove due process and CEQA protections. Both are bought and paid for by the corporate elite pushing the YIMBY Abundance doctrine.

Over a hundred cities have joined the effort to oppose SB 79, and the list is growing as more citizens learn about the bill. Opposition leaders are taking out all the stops to kill this bill. A grassroots effort generated thousands of emails throughout the state opposing SB 79. Some state reps have agreed to meet with voters to discuss the merits of SB79 and others have signaled they will not support it. SB 607 is becoming even less popular.

SAN FRANCISCO IS ONCE AGAIN A PIVOT POINT.

Many San Francisco residents oppose Wiener’s plan to upzone the city when they learn about it. One of Wiener’s most loyal supporters, Supervisor Joel Engardio is under threat of a recall. If Joel is taken out, more public voices will rise against Wiener’s bills and his supporters. This will not help Wiener’s case and may start the dominos falling on his Sb 79 transit argument he has run with as an excuse to upzone the state, since he dropped the original excuse that he was protecting the environment by removing cars. We don’t hear much of that lately. Now it is the tired old supply and demand argument that is gentrifying the “new” neighborhoods and resulting in higher not lower rents.

The problem goes way beyond  a split in the capital. The national press needs to do a better job at assessing the California voters’ outrage if they want to understand if they want to understand what is going on in California.