Richard Eber, California Political News and Views
As the state of California experiences a shortage of affordable housing, the Progressives in Sacramento continue to make absurd proposals to remedy the situation that would make Comrades Lenin, Stalin, or Chairman Mao proud.
As the state of California experiences a shortage of affordable housing, the Progressives in Sacramento continue to make absurd proposals to remedy the situation that would make Comrades Lenin, Stalin, or Chairman Mao proud.
The latest piece of legislation being considered is SB-330 AKA the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019.” According to its author Senator Nancy Skinner (D) Berkeley “The Bill would suspend, for a 10-year period, specific local rules and regulations that are recognized as obstacles to housing production, and it would establish reasonable time periods for processing housing permits”
Taken at face value we are to assume that by taking charge, the state would increase the supply of needed housing and make things more affordable. Looking at such public works projects as the Eastern Span replacement of the San Francisco Bay Bridge, the Bullet Train, and expansion of lanes on freeways throughout the State, it is difficult to imagine of even one instance where government agencies in California ever completed anything on time or on budget
While introducing SB-330 Skinner claims, “Overly cumbersome housing restrictions, parking requirements, and red tape have, in turn, helped make housing very expensive to build.” The new law would speed up the approval process for these needed projects she thinks.
Nowhere in this equation is there consideration that escalating construction expenses could possibly be attributed to:
- The high cost of land exasperated by unrealistic urban boundaries that have reduced acreage that can be developed while not taking into account projected population growth in the future.
- So called red tape and duplicate CEQA requirements along with court battles which have resulted in additional costs that only mega crony capitalist builders can afford to pay
- Project Labor Agreements (PLA) which requires union labor workers on large developments involving subsidies or use of State bond funds. This additional outlay of about 20% more does not make anything more affordable.
Also to be considered is the effect SB-330 might have on city services such as water, law enforcement, fire districts, schools, sewers recreation etc… In bypassing local government zoning concerns, the State does not apparently care how these vital services are to be provided for additional residents. Big Brother in Sacramento feels their “Build and they will come” methodology occurs without consequences for the affected communities
Another wild card that SB-330 does not address is traffic and parking. While Skinner opposes all down zoning and providing fewer parking spaces for residents, there is little concern for how these folks will get around.
Instead unaccountable regional planning agencies propped up by bureaucrats in Sacramento are certain those families occupying these new Project Development Areas will gladly abandon their cars in favor of public transportation and bicycles. While such policies might work in cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Jose, there is no evidence that Californians want to abandon use of their 4 wheel conveyances of choice quite yet.
I am waiting for one of the lame brain Progressive legislators from San Francisco to introduce bills to give tax breaks to purchase self driving bicycles and solar powered shopping carts. Of course there would be subsidies for low income folks who would reside in affordable new State approved projects lacking parking spaces.
To make things even worse Nancy Skinner and her associates have other provisions in SB-330 that would “ban the demolition of rent-controlled or Section 8 housing. And it would prohibit the demolition of affordable housing units, unless they offer tenants relocation assistance and the first right of refusal to units in the new housing development at commensurate rents to what the tenants had been paying.”
Just think what such a provision would mean to developers. They would have to provide subsidies to existing tenants that are living where these new buildings would be constructed. Of course the cost of doing this would need to be passed on to market rate housing that is being built. In the end such subsidies discourage new housing starts which exasperate the problems Skinner is trying to alleviate.
Such social engineering concepts can only lead to an outcome where “The operation was success but the patient died. The flawed reasoning of SB-330 is just another example of the shortcomings of leftist political philosophy in action. It is more reminiscent of the failed Five Year Plans in the old Soviet Union than the capitalistic spirit that has made California what it is today.
AB-330 is merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the assault on local government from the Left. Currently debate rages on in the legislature over Senator Scott Weiner’s (D- San Francisco SB-50 which is another attempt to resurrect failed legislation from 2018 to force local government to expand housing regardless of what the consequences might be.
Thus far this bill has received opposition from such diverse organizations as the California League of Cities to Susan Kirsch’s Livable California. This has resulted in the Senate Appropriations Committee putting SB-50 in “suspense” which likely means it is being put aside during the current legislation session this year.
However, as we know in Sacramento bills such as this can be resurrected just before the body adjourns. It is also possible that a compromise package can be worked out among Democrats that might put a so called “SB-50 Lite” version together. In reality, with less than one third of seats, Republicans can do little more than be cheer leaders in opposing bills such as this.
Before we break out the bubbly, there are also other equally troubling housing bills being proposed by Socialistic forces in Sacramento. Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) has several of them the hopper including:
Assembly Bill 1487 would address the housing crisis in the Bay Area by creating yet another unaccountable regional agency. Its intent is to stifle local control and impose the State’s will on residents.
Assembly Bill 11 would allow cities and counties to create agencies that would use tax increment financing to fund affordable housing and infrastructure projects. This is an attempt to bring back the disbanded State redevelopment agency to cities and have property taxes used to redistribute wealth thru financing so called affordable housing. How affordable this housing might be is a mute point.
Assembly Bill 1763 is supposed to boost affordable housing production in California. In doing so, money would be spent more efficiently constructing taller and more populated structures. As a result of increased density discounts given developers to build additional units, costs are supposed come down. Of course this looks good on paper except for the fact that Chiu’s proposed legislation completely ignores the effects this added congestion will have on surrounding areas.
This move by the left promoting increasing housing construction via mega projects continues every week. While public outcry might temporarily delay SB-50 from being enacted, there are new Draconian proposals being conjured up almost every month?
Progressive politicians will not stop until they have all decision making authority under their dictatorial control or voters kick them out of office. For the rest of us this will mean we need to fight back or “Tears shall drown the wind” for the California of tomorrow.
The latest piece of legislation being considered is SB-330 AKA the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019.” According to its author Senator Nancy Skinner (D) Berkeley “The Bill would suspend, for a 10-year period, specific local rules and regulations that are recognized as obstacles to housing production, and it would establish reasonable time periods for processing housing permits”
Taken at face value we are to assume that by taking charge, the state would increase the supply of needed housing and make things more affordable. Looking at such public works projects as the recent San Francisco the Bay Bridge tower, The Bullet Train, and new highway improvements, it is difficult to imagine of even one instance where government agencies in California ever completed anything on time or on budget
While introducing SB-330 Skinner claims that in addition to banning down zoning, “Overly cumbersome housing restrictions, parking requirements, and red tape have, in turn, helped make housing very expensive to build.” The new law would speed up the approval process for these projects she thinks.
Nowhere in this equation is there consideration that escalating construction expenses could possibly be attributed to:
- The high cost of land exasperated by unrealistic urban boundaries that have reduced acreage that can be developed and has not taken into account projected growth in the future.
- So called red tape and duplicate CEQA requirements and court battles which result in additional costs that only mega crony capitalist builders can afford pay.
- Project Labor Agreements (PLA”S) which require union labor workers on large developments involving subsidies or use of State bond funds. This additional outlay of about 20% more does not make anything more affordable.
Also to be considered is the effect SB-330 might have on city services such as water, law enforcement, fire districts, schools, sewers recreation etc… In bypassing local government zoning concerns, the State does not apparently care how these vital services are to be provided for additional residents. Big Brother in Sacramento feels their “Build and they will come” methodology occurs without consequences for the effected communities
Another wild card that SB-330 does not address is traffic and parking. While Skinner opposes all down zoning and providing fewer parking spaces for residents, there is little concern for how these folks will get around.
Instead regional planning agencies propped up by bureaucrats in Sacramento are certain those families occupying these new Project Development Areas will gladly abandon their cars in favor of public transportation and bicycles. While such policies might work in cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Jose, there is no evidence that Californians want to abandon use of their 4 wheel conveyances of choice quite yet.
I am waiting for one of the lame brain Progressive legislators from San Francisco to introduce bills to give tax breaks to buy self driving bicycles and solar powered shopping carts. Of course there would be subsidies for low income folks who would reside in affordable new State approved projects that lack for parking facilities.
To make things even worse Nancy Skinner and her associates have other provisions in SB-330 that would “ban the demolition of rent-controlled or Section 8 housing. And it would prohibit the demolition of affordable housing units, unless they offer tenants relocation assistance and the first right of refusal to units in the new housing development at commensurate rents to what the tenants had been paying.”
Just think what such a provision would mean to developers. They would have to provide subsidies to existing tenants that are living where these new buildings would be constructed. Of course the cost of doing this would need to be passed on to market rate housing that is being built. In the end such subsidies discourage new housing starts which exasperates the problems Skinner is trying to alleviate.
Such social engineering concepts can only lead to an outcome where “The operation was success but the patient died. The flawed reasoning of SB-330 is just another example of the shortcomings of leftist political philosophy in action. It is more reminiscent of the failed Five Year Plans in the old Soviet Union than the capitalistic spirit that has made California what it is today.
AB-330 is merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the assault on local government from the Left. Currently debate rages on in the legislature over Senator Scott Weiner’s (D- San Francisco SB-50 which is another attempt to resurrect failed legislation from 2018 to force local government to expand housing regardless of what the consequences might be in their communities.
Thus far this bill has received opposition from such diverse organizations as the California League of Cities to Susan Kirsch’s Livable California. This has resulted in the Senate Appropriations Committee putting SB-50 in “suspense” which likely means it is being put aside during the current legislation session this year.
However, as we know in Sacramento bills such as this can be resurrected just before the body adjourns. It is also possible that a compromise package can be worked out among Democrats that might put a so called “SB-50 Lite” version together. In reality, with less than one third of seats, Republicans can do little more than be cheer leaders in opposing bills such as this.
Before we break out the bubbly, there are also other equally troubling housing bills being proposed by Socialistic forces in Sacramento. David Chiu (D-San Francisco) has several of them the hopper that have moved to the Housing Committee including:
Assembly Bill 1487 would address the housing crisis in the Bay Area by creating yet another regional agency. In reality this would be an unaccountable government bureaucratic tool that faces no public scrutiny. Its intent is to stifle local control and impose the State’s will on residents.
Assembly Bill 11 would allow cities and counties to create agencies that would use tax increment financing to fund affordable housing and infrastructure projects. This is an attempt to bring back the disbanded State redevelopment agency to cities and have property taxes used to redistribute wealth thru so called affordable housing. How affordable this housing might be is open to question as only union workers would be allowed to be involved with the construction process.
Assembly Bill 1763 is supposed to boost affordable housing production in California. In doing so, money would be spent more efficiently constructing taller and more populated structures. As a result of increased density discounts given developers to build additional units, costs are supposed come down. Of course this looks good on paper except for the fact that Chiu’s proposed legislation completely ignores the effects this added congestion will have on affected areas.
This move by the left promoting increasing housing construction via mega projects, continues every week. While public outcry might temporarily delay SB-50, from being enacted, there are new Draconian proposals being conjured up almost every month?
Progressive politicians will not stop until they have all decision making authority wrested from the voters or be defeated at the polls. For the rest of us this will mean we need to fight back or “Tears shall drown the wind” for the California of tomorrow.
Richard Eber studied journalism at the University of Oregon. He writes about politics, culture, education restaurants, and was former city and sports editor of UCSB Daily. Richard is president of Amerasa Rapid Transit, a specialized freight forwarder.
Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE
BTW, SB 330 is removing regulations. What’s more capitalistic than that?