Happy Saturday, folks!
Last week, a lawsuit was filed against SB10, which allows cities to more quickly rezone neighborhoods for multifamily housing.
Today, at NIMBY group Livable California's biweekly meeting, attorney Stu Flashman will provide an analysis of the suit. 🧵
For those of you unfamiliar with Stu, he's a well-known attorney all over the state, mostly for losing lawsuits.
He famously (and unsuccessfully) sued to stop high-speed rail in California on behalf of Atherton, the 3rd wealthiest town in the country.
The lawsuit against Scott Wiener's SB10 was filed by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, known for fighting new housing and for being regarded as a slumlord by its tenants.
latimes.com/homeless-housi…
We've got a planner for LA County in the chat who hates SB9 and SB10. Municipal SoCal governments not sending their best, folks!
We've been dealing with "technical issues" with screen sharing Stu's presentation for the last 5 or so minutes.
Someone in the chat recommends "turning it off and turning it back on again"
lol
A slide of all the areas that Stu says could be rezoned for multifamily housing in LA under SB10.
Author's note: damn, that's based as hell!
Stu says not all places will see new apartments. He claims Beverly Hills will not see new housing via SB10 because it's too expensive to build there.
Author's note: you won't see new housing under SB10 in Beverly Hills because the bill is *optional* and they won't use it!!!
Replacing a large single-family home in Palo Alto with 8 new homes?
Again, based as hell! We love to see it!
Stu is engaging in some pretty absurd fearmongering here, claiming that the legislature will now enact bills to eliminate local ordinances on rent control or prohibiting chokeholds.
Says it sets "a dangerous precedent."
Wow, now that SB9 and SB10 have passed and been signed by the governor they're really taking the masks off
Missed this absolute gem: someone in the chat claims that allowing cities to override local zoning ordinances to rezone for neighborhoods for small apartments is akin to "curtailing voting rights in Georgia."
Whew.
Palo Alto City Councilmember Lydia Kou calls SB9 and SB10 "authoritarian," calls for an investigation of Senate Pro Tem Toni Atkins
Libby Henry from the affluent East Bay suburb of Lafayette is speaking now. She's very about the very premise of there being a "housing crisis," asks "don't they ever have to provide proof?"
Then says "there sure isn't a housing crisis in Lafayette."
Claire from La Jolla asks how "they can say there's a housing crisis" when "they" haven't addressed AirBnB's.
Then mentions that she's a real estate agent.
Author's note: lol
Coralin Feierbach, former Mayor of Belmont is here. Asks whether this lawsuit will go to the US Supreme Court.
Flashman: no, that's not how this works
Author's note: again, lol
So this is definitely low-key racist/classist
SoCal environmental advocate Jennifer Tanner is here.
Starts off saying "it's not true that we have a housing crisis, we have an affordable housing crisis."
Says that there are "all these empty buildings, how can there be a crisis?"
Incredible legal analysis out of Lafayette
A NIMBY named Cary Brazeman says that "a group of us" are looking at challenging SB9 under state fair housing law
Author's note: l m a o
Elizabeth Henry of Los Altos says it's important that this remains a bipartisan issue. Says there are great democrats just as there are great Republicans.
Says if you "play this out to its logical conclusion," this isn't "not in my backyard" it's "death to all backyards."
Jill Stewart now fear mongering and spreading incorrect information about building in high fire areas, implies that Paradise will be quadrupled in density under SB9.
Shameless shit, Jill.
Tricia Crane, a NIMBY from Santa Monica, is mad that her local "YIMBY-dominated" planning commission is relying on data from the UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing.
Asks if Livable California has a more reputable source of data.
Side-note: to his credit, Flashman has spent tons of time on the call trying to explain that SB10 is optional, that cities don't have to implement it if they don't want to, and people are *so* confused.
It's because Livable California has deliberately mislead people.
A woman named Laura just suggested sending people to Detroit where there's vacant housing, then claimed that this would be better than making California look like a 3rd world country.
A commenter named Mark Dutton says that Scott Wiener has branded this as an issue of racism.
Says that when he talks to young people and renters, they strongly support these bills. Suggests trying to bring them into the fold.
Jovita Mendoza, a proponent of the statewide NIMBY initiative, says that SB9 is the real racism, and that the state is only going after single-family homes now because people of color are moving in.
Again, whew.
Lorna Boyd says this is “so not about racism.” Says she’s lived in her home for 45 years and that this will decimate single-family neighborhoods.
Author's note: lol, and that feels a *tad* dramatic, Lorna
LA real estate agent Tracy Thrower Conyers chimes in says they need to pay attention to progressives in congress who’re conditioning infrastructure money on ending exclusionary zoning.
Personal note: we love to see it!
Barry Smith, a NIMBY from hyperaffluent (and 65% white) Bay Area suburb Los Altos Hills says that housing issues aren't about race.
Why? Because he has neighbors of multiple ethnicities, of course!
One more call for fundraising by Rick Hall, president of LCA, and we're done.
As always, thanks for reading, folks. Enjoy the rest of your weekend!
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.