I mean, just my own consumption is down 90% from my college days :)
Patent attorney, astrophysicist, & Stack-and-Packist 🏙️🥑🔋⛷️. Ready to help enforce state housing law.
509 followers 193 following 2,861 posts
view profile on Bluesky
I mean, just my own consumption is down 90% from my college days :)
"Alcohol consumption has hit a 90-year low". The wealthy boomers are aging out of their heaviest drinking years. Younger generations are generally less interested in alcohol, both for financial and general reasons.
Mayor Lurie is proposing a reasonable, long overdue re-zoning to allow more homes in SF, particularly by transit. It’ll help make SF more affordable. NIMBY-in-chief Aaron Peskin is opposed & threatening a ballot measure. Such a measure will fail. The era of empowering housing obstruction is over.
We need more homes near public transit in California! It will lower costs for families, make riding transit easier, make our transit systems stronger, and reduce traffic and greenhouse gas emissions. It’s common sense! Tell your Senator and Assemblymember to vote yes on SB 79!
"work on outdated zoning ordinances." Welcome to YIMBY. That's what sb79 does. We need more market rate and more affordable housing.
prop. 13 is terrible, but you're just completely missing that prop. 19 enables seniors to take their lower tax basis with them. It's not an excuse anymore.
The fact that so many people still keeping citing sb330 for the rule that you can't deny zoning compliant housing shows yeah, they're just not up to speed.
🔥 the letter-sending work @housingdefense.bsky.social does is boring but vital: in the best case, we help busy city leaders know what state law is, and in the worst case, we remind them it is enforced. You can help fund that work and get more housing, like this, built: calhdf.org/donate/
We do eventually need to fix the law so that these letters aren't required for standing purposes.
So no.
My understanding is that we organization has more to do with funding for affordable housing than it does with the policy weakness of HCD.
If they did scrutinize for AFFH, housing elements would never be accepted.
"I have little faith in HCD" Yeah.....
It is, and it isn't. Father of 3 that fit three car seats in the back of a Nissan Leaf.
Of course not forgetting that any local plan should be scrutinized for all other legal requirements. Affirmatively furthering fair housing for example.
I have little faith in HCD, and really dislike the whole concept, but this is the hand we've been dealt.
The "feasible" requirement is perhaps a tiny step up from mere zoned capacity, and we need to hammer that in comments to HCD to avoid local abuse.
If sb79 passes with these "transit-oriented development alternative plan(s)", YIMBYs are going to need to engage in essentially a new housing element style oversight process. The bill requires maintaining the same "total feasible capacity for units and floor area."
In practice, i suspect the local alternative option will be used to shift housing to lower income areas (and undevelopable sites in a housing element like fraud on the bill's goal). IMHO, any limit on housing near transit, rich or poor area, is a violation of affirmatively furthering fair housing
The context of the bill itself only makes this worse. The bill already allows cities to do redlining, but it has to be within a single jurisdiction. So they're demanding either (a) a wildly politically unworkable regional shifting or (b) just less housing in the low income areas.
ACT-LA wants SB 79 to only apply in high income neighborhoods. In other words, they believe that only homeowners in white, wealthy neighborhoods should be given millions of additional home equity. Redlining, but from the left.
Here we go: war in the Elmwood (i doubt most people care)
Stressed and duress are not the same thing.
"duress: threats, violence, constraints, or other action brought to bear on someone to do something against their will or better judgment." This doesn't cover someone looking for a new apartment, even on a rush basis to get out of a decrepit rental.
And again, being in a rush to find a new apartment is not itself duress.
That's not how leases work. If it was roach infested, the lease would already be violated by the landlord. Landlords don't just collect the remaining lease, they have a duty to mitigate. Etc. etc.
Gosh if only people could have sold off half their parcel to fund rebuilding. Oh wait, Newsom, Bass, and local pols stripped homeowners of their sb9 rights.
And Newsom hasn't given his view of sb79.
Reminder that Newsom has failed to take a position on sb79. Do better Newsom.
[BILL ALERT] SB 79, which broadly legalizes more homes near high quality transit stops, has passed the Assembly appropriations committee! The bill now goes to the Assembly floor, then back to the Senate for concurrence. Learn more: cayimby.org/legislation/...
that he may have been vacating his old apartment under duress doesn't mean he was under duress when signing the new lease
It's all branded bro truck nonsense.
The home battery market in the US is wildly broken. $1,000 quote just for permit drawings. Solaredge not supporting new installations of the cheap competing battery. $20k quote for a single Franklin battery installed. Maybe the end of the 30% tax credit will discipline this market to reality...
Infill housing does not negatively impact neighborhoods. Be specific about if you think your neighborhood was ruined.
Fixing broken regulations that ban things we need is not deregulation.
The Forbes piece is spot on. Might as well be in denial of climate change if you actually believe those myths.
No, I'm referring to supply and demand. Filtering is more a description of what happens to older housing within the supply and demand outline. It filters up in a shortage, down in a well supplied market.
IRL, CA YIMBY endorsed statewide rent stabilization and more public funding.
So you fully agree with all the major YIMBY groups then. Got it. All their policies for market rate are helpful, and support for public subsidy too.
Ugh, it should be for title insurance!
I do not care if corporations buy housing and rent it out. That increases the rental supply. They will also stop doing it if we allow more housing. It's a symptom, not a cause.
Kalama Harris's anti investor rhetoric was grounded in political populism, not evidence. In practice, banning investors from buying homes just reduces access for renters. The price-setting tool thing was more populism, when in reality the anti-monopoly laws were already dismantling realpage.
yes, the homeowners who enacted exclusionary zoning are enriched by the resulting rising property values. and yes, a small amount of housing is bought by wall street, because wall street isn't dumb and realizes the nimbys are likely to continue blocking new housing.
hedge funds were not the force behind exclusionary zoning. Just badly wrong
"Oh no, how will cities survive more tax revenue and a higher supply of housing driving rents and prices lower."
You're pretending that cities will somehow be harmed by more market rate housing.
We clearly do not agree on the basics. You're pretending the housing shortage is somehow exclusive to subsidized housing, when the vast majority of residents are in market rate housing. You're pretending more market rate housing won't lower prices.
bsky.app/profile/abou...
That paper is not presenting evidence of a casual link between good cause and rent stabilization on new housing, and supply. It's making an argument that various things that we broadly support, like good cause even on older housing, raise rent. Without specifying a causal mechanism.
Maybe, but I am still not comfortable with the idea of arbitrary evictions and the associated annoyances of moving. What would convince me is evidence that these policies actually hurt new supply.
In theory, maybe. But show me some evidence that above inflation rent stabilization and good cause protections actually discourage new construction. Those are big things to give up without evidence.
I turned my old home into a rental during COVID. Haven't hid that. But if you think Berkeley residents would be better off with a mortgage cost 2-3x the rental cost, you do you.
I think just cause protections for residents of new housing is more important.
I've seen no evidence that a new construction exemption is necessary for above inflation limits. As a former golden duplex landlord, no I don't think it's necessary to exempt people like me.
The Republican city wanted the bill passed.
The bill shouldn't have exemptions for new housing or small landlords. It's not perfect. But the above inflation limits is sufficient to avoid supply harms.
Left NIMBYs do this thing where they assume absolutely everything said by someone who isn't a tenant advocate is pure evil and false. Good luck with that
I know, we should let cities adopt 50% inclusionary zoning. Half of all* new housing is affordable, absolutely a win for tenants! *Wait, why don't we have any new housing anymore.
The most damaging forms of rent control were adopted by cities like Santa Monica, Berkeley, and SF.
x.com/dril/status/...
I support tenants by opposing things that hurt them in the end, despite having tenant friendly sounding *names*, like unlimited rent control and unfunded inclusionary zoning. YIMBYs look beyond the name, you don't.
The drafters knew better, but wanted to push their vision of a mass takings.
it would be better if the state law had guardrails. If it banned below inflation limits on combination with vacancy control, especially when applied to new housing. You seem to believe if you call it rent control, it must be good. I think that reliance on the name is left NIMBY bs.
I unfollowed you because it became clear you're toxic, and you're just proving me right with that blocking AH comment.
New NIMBY logic. Why can't we have sb79? In-N-Out Burger can't handle it.
Ignoring the potential for abuse when there's no guardrails is peak left NIMBY bullshit.
Ahh yes, because what California needed was below inflation rent control with vacancy control on brand new housing.
For one, visibility of unhoused could increase public demand for more policing
I'm a housing theory of everything guy, in the form of I believe most these other issues are heavily dependent on the housing shortage.
Oh fun. We used to live like a block from here. One time, while in law school, there was an armed standoff across the street....
I'd optimistically amend that to "was."
LA's unfunded mandate is the prohibition on productive uses besides single family homes for the vast majority of its land. It was done locally decades ago.
She should be ejected from the Democratic party.
She could not have been more annoying. Her positive example of local control was, assuming the original project was zoning compliant, illegal under state law.
The most generous reading is she's talking about how infrastructure needs to be upgraded. But that's what the impact and property taxes are for!
That's not capitalism, that's design review boards.
Or that limit the fraction that can be renter out. That's unacceptable.
My context here is HOAs that interfere with solar or that try to block increases in density from ADUs, lot splits, etc.
To the extent HOAs try to enforce renter limits and the like, they should be nuked. If it's just landscaping and the like, they're fine. It seems apparent from replies that OP is nakedly anti-renter, great that it doesn't apply to you.
HOAs going bankrupt... Sorry but ...
I think it's bad to attack people building badly needed housing because the housing will be for renters instead of owners.
Corporate landlord enable renters to rent in areas that otherwise require homeownership. That's a good thing. If you hate corporate landlords, or any landlords, making money for doing nothing. Build more. Even if owned by corporations, just build more.
To recap, op and you hate renters and want to pretend that's progressive.
The commodification of residential housing by *homeowners* sure. Their refusal to allow growth that would challenge their equity. The rest is a fly on the wall.
A sitting City Councilmember specifically calling out Sherman Oaks NIMBYs as a driver of Los Angeles' high rents and home prices in a video explicitly endorsing YIMBYism suggests that a major change is happening in Los Angeles housing politics.
We’d like to wish a very abundant 8/27 to all who celebrate.
The conspiracy minded might think the developer is just out to collect a fee.
Reminds me of the Habitat project near me. Consumed $5 million in local funds, unknown additional subsidy, all to achieve the same amount of affordable housing as the denser market rate project across the street.
It's great to increase the affordable housing stock, but this doesn't seem like a large enough jump in density to really justify the demolition, assuming these should still be in decent condition given 2003 work.
Possible example of this. There's a project in Walnut Creek to redevelop affordable housing. If I'm reading it right, 29 affordable homes that was rehabbed in 2003 are being demo'ed for 87 new ones. www.sahahomes.org/properties/s... www.walnutcreekca.gov/government/c...
Put another way, you're already endorsing our big bill of the year. What other policy changes should we make. The more specific the better.
I just don't buy that theory. Transit and infrastructure is made easier with density. I see limited ability for policy to follow this ideal you're establishing.
This is silly. We are fine with whatever approach gives us better housing (and transit). And if you're still endorsing our major bills, like sb79, it's just problematizing for no purpose.
Agreed, we need to reconfigure society.
*biases
Flippers are the people who would be building small multifamily if we let them. They're not land owners profiting by doing nothing. Airbnb and the like are just rounding errors, and attacking them just bosses the market from one kind of tenant user to another. You can, but it's no silver bullet.
Of course people who own land are profiting, and they're fighting more supply. But who owns the majority of land? Homeowners.
If by landlords, you mean homeowners who fought density, sure.
with Bass coming out against sb79, Raman would be an instant improvement