Blog Post < Previous | Next >
Richard Hall
The “Mission Accomplished” Heroes of the Housing Crisis
The new Scott Wiener legislation, Senate Bills 827 and 828, presume cities and counties control the number of development proposals submitted and penalizes them when not enough housing is built. However cities and counties only control zoning - and all cities and county provide room for growth - they do not actually build housing.
Wiener's new laws forcing up-zoning in Marin, have the effect of accelerating WinCup-like luxury developments that developers can make pencil out, profitably. This type of development serves more affluent residents who commute to SF worsening, worsening traffic, and not improving it. Studies show that more affluent residents are more likely to drive than take transit.
However, combating these ill-conceived laws is going to be very difficult for a variety of reasons, the biggest of which is that there are no quick fixes or easy answers to California's housing challenges.
Funding for Low and Middle Income Housing is the Real Issue
The real underlying issue is that ever since the Reagan Administration there's a lack of funding for low and middle income housing -- what we really need to solve the housing crisis so there are more proposals for low and middle income housing. Part III of Bob Silvestri's recent series of articles explains this really well:
Yuppies in My Backyard: SB-827 and Deconstructing Community, Part III
Proposals for low and middle income housing are rarely made in Marin, because they are not profitable and there's a lack of sufficient subsidy funding available. Yet the state sets "housing quotas" for each city and county (the Regional Housing Needs Assessment - RHNA), and these are the quotas Wiener's laws are now giving teeth to.
Weiner's bills all overlook the cause and effect relationship between demanding more development and the creation of more luxury housing, which fails to provide affordability while increasing negative impacts such as traffic congestion, longer commutes, and many others.
The Press Invalidly Praises Sacramento for Solving the Housing Crisis
State representatives, cheered on by a sympathetic press, are presented as heroes for solving the "housing crisis" with bills like SB827, SB827 and SB743. In actuality this is really a “Mission Accomplished” moment - these state representatives are helping developers remove restrictions to building more luxury housing, expanding the labor force for highly paid workers at booming tech companies, and effectively worsening the housing "affordability" crisis. In return the politicians continue to receive sizable campaign donations from the real estate industry and construction unions helping secure their re-election.
Developers are happy to have zoning and approval barriers removed - and what they are building are market rate units - and if Seattle is any example to go by these units are priced 40% above the rent of existing units.
Wiener’s Solutions Fail to Resolve the Elephant in the Room: Funding Affordable Housing
Unfortunately, the real story about how to address our housing affordability crisis is far more complex. Sadly, if that is ignored, the likely outcome is that Sacramento politicians pass Wieners bills and make themselves look like heroes. However the real consequences are that for profit developers make out like bandits building luxury apartments, tech companies will get more housing without it costing them a dime, while the rest of us - who aren't as organized - sit in worsening traffic, suffer water shortages, our children sit in larger sized classes, and we pay higher fees and taxes to support declining public services for their folly.
With SB 827 and SB 828, the housing crisis isn't solved at all.
The political challenges for communities opposing the Wiener legislation
Here are some of the challenges communities have in getting their messages across that Wiener’s proposals are a bad idea.
- Wiener and other State Democrats are getting big press for "solving the housing crisis.” The mainstream media has even less patience for the complexities than politicians. For politicians it's a simple message that makes them appear heroes. However, the counter arguments against SB827 and SB828 are more complex because they deal with these bills ineffectiveness all the unintended consequences. The challenge is to have simple public messaging but do so in a way that explains the complex reasons why Wiener’s agenda is a bad idea.
- Prior legislation, such as SB35 (qualifying developments bypass local and environmental review), SB743 (removing traffic congestion considerations of new development) and AB1515 (undermining zoning decisions by local agencies) have already laid the groundwork for Wiener’s new ideas. And, although local elected officials opposed SB35, state representatives simply ignored them. They will most likely ignore them again. The challenge is to get state elected officials to listen. Unless our locally elected officials get up on top of their desks and get really loud, it will be hard to stop that.
- State elected officials, particularly Democrats, are scared to oppose Wiener, because many of them are running for re-election this year, and don’t want to risk losing. They are afraid that if they speak out against the Wiener bills, they will be branded as “against affordable housing.”
- California Senate President pro Tempore and erstwhile Democratic leader in Sacramento, Kevin DeLeon, has already taken a strong position declaring that his fellow Democrats “don’t squander ‘major’ housing breakthrough”. DeLeon’s top campaign donors are $584,900 from labor and construction unions and $339,565 from real estate, insurance and finance. The messaging challenge is to be clear that communities support affordable housing development but not the kind of out of control growth that Wiener is proposing.
- Although Democrats already dominate CA, in coming elections the “Trump effect” (for good reasons) will probably further magnify this. However, in that climate, it will be hard to tell people to vote against a Democratic candidate who is supporting Wiener’s agenda.
- Dianne Feinstein may run for re-election. I can’t imagine her or any Democrat coming out against Wiener’s proposals in the sort of sound bites that will ultimately decide who wins her seat. Again, the challenge is that the complexity of the enormous damage SB827 and SB828 will do to our communities will be labeled as being “against growth and housing” by those looking to quickly discredit it.
- Local officials are writing comments opposing Wiener’s proposals. However, they are mostly saying that the proposals need to be modified to respond to their concerns. I don’t think they know what they are up against. Their position should be that both SB827 and SB 828 should be abandoned entirely. Anything less will result in a so-called “compromise” that will still be totally unacceptable to residents.
So, what does the community need to do?The community pushed back on Plan Bay Area, but was ignored. The community pushed back on SB35, and was again ignored. In the face of this it would be easy to feel overwhelmed by all this and just give up.
I would suggest that is a very bad idea this time around.We have reached a tipping point in the fight to maintain local control of our General Plans, our zoning and the fundamental purposes of locally elected government. Ultimately this is a fight for quality of life - against traffic gridlock, droughts, higher taxes and degraded public services.