Thread by @cafedujord

Happy Saturday, folks!

Earlier this week, the state of California ended single-family zoning. This morning, statewide NIMBY group Livable California gathers for their biweekly meeting.

Grab some 🍿and your favorite beverage, because the copefest is about to begin! 🧵

Meeting starts off with Rick Hall saying that "many bad bills that don't do anything to make housing more affordable" have passed.

And while that's bad, he says that "for a while" they're turning their focus to affordable housing.

Rick also touts a constitutional initiative to return all control of land use to cities. Says this would "solve all our problems."

Author's note: not sure how that furthers affordable housing, Rick!

Jill Stewart is now going off on a rant about "attacking the cities" for not building affordable housing. Says that the problem is just about funding, and that the state "will not spend a penny" on affordable housing.

Author's note: we rate this claim "l o l"

We're moving onto the main part of the meeting, which is how Livable California will address affordable housing.

To tell us how to get "real" affordable housing, they're bringing on Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association members Jeff and Maria Kalban.

Author's note: again, L O L

Maria Kalban is now confusing supply and demand for trickle down economics, a common NIMBY mistake.

She also touts the local control constitutional initiative as a solution to the affordable housing crisis.

Maria says upzoning doesn't work, won't create affordable housing. To prove this, she cites SoHo in New York City, which she says became wealthier and whiter after upzoning.

Author's note: one big problem, SoHo hasn't been upzoned! Wealthy and white is it's pre-upzoned state!

"We also want to discuss with our legislators about how to protect individual homeowners from more market rate housing."

Claims "the international community has tuned in."

Author's note: again, l o l

Kalban now claims that "a growing body of academic work" proves supply and demand don't work. She cites the (thoroughly debunked) Rodríguez-Pose/Storper piece, and now I really need a drink.

Kalban is now talking about Blackstone and other large financial companies "turning everyone into lifelong renters" and our legislators being "unconcerned" about that

We're now talking about the state needing to fund "community parking" and I'm about ready to gouge my eyes out.

Jeff Kalban now speaking. Claims that the best place for new housing is not in our neighborhoods, but instead on commercial boulevards/arterials.]

Author's note: housing on commercial boulevards/arterials often has higher cases of asthma and other respiratory issues, so...

Jeff seems confused. He says come January, the legislature will be back to bashing single-family zoning, so they need to be able to counter with alternatives.

Author's note: did you not hear about Newsom signing #SB9, or...

Rick Hall is now speaking again, and he's talking about various things they should try to address. One of those things is "the urban concentration issue," and I'm dying to know what this means.

Author's note: pretty sure it's an endorsement of exurban sprawl, lol

Lots of fun comments in the chat. NIMBYs are crying about the loss of "historic" single-family zones under SB9.

Fun fact: SB9 (tragically) doesn't even apply to historic districts.

We're on to member comments! Affluent Montecito architect Bill Babbit wants to know "what happens legally" now with SB9 and SB10.

Says he assumes they'll be paused/unusable until the constitutional amendment to return land use to the state moves forward.

Author's note: L O L

A NIMBY in the chat accidentally says the quiet part out loud, worries that if Livable focuses on supposed "affordable housing" efforts, they won't be able to get rid of SB9 and SB10.

Incredible.

Someone is cooking and clearly chopping something while another NIMBY is trying to speak, lol

Barbara Briode from LA is here whining about the housing element, very concerned about it.

Recommends "recruiting" more land-use attorneys.

Thinks that they need to get involved in a lawsuit in regard to at least SB10, seek a legal injunction to stop it's implementation.

Barbara is now going off on a weird tangent about VMT (vehicle miles traveled), an environmental/transport metric.

She says it's harming new housing, that the state mandated it, and we should hit pause on it.

Author's note: gonna be a "definitely not" from me

NIMBY Joanne Nuckols asks whether the cities actually have to implement SB9 and SB10, and, uh...

Barry Smith, a NIMBY from hyper affluent Los Altos hills (and a Mountain View landlord) is here!

Says there are 7,000,000 homeowners in California, that's who we have to enlist (as opposed to renters, who another commenter recommended recruiting)

Redondo Beach Mayor Bill Brand is here! He says says SB9 is done, they lost, and they need to focus on his statewide local control iniativie.

He also says that SB10 is unconstitutional, and that their council will direct the city attorney to fight it.

Whew, Bill ends his comment by saying that all the new housing under SB9 will be rentals, and that’ll destroy their quality of life, so they need to focus on the constitutional initiative.

Author's note: w h e w l a d

Holy shit, local NIMBY and former Belmont mayor Coralin Feierbach truly says the quiet part out loud: "I don't care about affordable housing, I care about the local control initiative."

There it is, folks! We got 'em!

NIMBY Tony Wilkinson says they can't just focus on homeowners, claims "a lot of these liberal young kids are voting for these things, they're not homeowners."

Author's note: folks, it's true.

A comment I missed: Duffy Price, from hyper affluent Los Altos Hills, urges people to get involved in the housing element process.

Says she attended a local meeting on this, and she was frustrated to see that there were YIMBYs there!

Author's note: we love to see it!

Anna Marie Gott from Santa Barbara is here to rail against trickle-down housing, then says that the real issue is wages.

She then proceeds to go off on a tangent about student housing, recommends cutting community college admissions to reduce housing demand.

Gross.

Libby Henry from affluent Bay Area suburb Lafayette says she's going through depression because of the passage of SB9 and SB10.

Author's note: sorry, but lol

NIMBY James O'Sullivan is here to whine about SB9, says Bill Brand is right, they lost the battle.

Tells the group that, "in military terms, the wall has been breached, and we have to get troops into that gap right now, and start pushing back."

W H E W

O'Sullivan also says that the media and the news is really "the controlled opposition" and, uh, wow

The chat is buzzing like crazy today, to the point where it's hard to keep up. This is a new favorite though.

We're now fighting about whether or not SB9 applies in fire zones. (Spoiler alert: it does not).

Jill Stewart claims that it does, that everyone (Sacramento pols, the UC Berkeley Terner Center, other experts, etc.) are all wrong, but Livable California is right.

Again, L O L

Berkeley NIMBY Shirley Dean says she appreciates the worries about affordable housing, but that "right now, my concern is public safety."

Says Berkeley's RHNA goal is impossible. Also very mad that if you oppose ending single-family zoning, you get branded a racist.

This is one of the funniest things I've seen today: a NIMBY thinks there'll be lines out the door in permitting offices on January 1, suggests sending photographers.

"The builders are coming!" 😂😂😂

Folks, is allowing people to build two homes instead of one home on their own personal property a "socialist government ruling layer?"

NIMBYs say yes!

Incredible screed about young people and social justice by Los Angeles NIMBY Tony Wilkinson

Torrance NIMBY Amy Josefek says that they should be going to their city councils and demand that they don't use SB10.

Guess they're *finally* acknowledging that it's a local control bill! 🙃🙃🙃

Barbara Broide recommends not opposing SB10 in some cities, because there might be people who actually want more housing, and the bill will end up getting used to provide it.

Incredible.

LOL, Torrance NIMBY Amy Josefek now recommends "unionizing" homeowners, and making their efforts to fight state control a "union effort."

Author's note: m'am, that is extremely *not* unionizing

Danessa from Cupertino is here and she is piiiiised. She's whining about AB1174, which closes loopholes and clarifies language in SB35, and will allow the 2,400 unit, 50% affordable Vallco Project to go forward.

Author's note: we love to see it

Danessa recommends contacting philanthropists, movie stars, and Michael Moore (lmao) to donate to the local control initiative and fight these housing bills.

NIMBY Pat Marriott is concerned about the iniative, wants to know how much money has been raised, wants to see a sense of urgency. Says NIMBY groups are fractured as to how to proceed, claims "even the anointed ones" can't agree on what to do.

Hilarious, and we love to see it!

Answering Danessa's question, Jill Stewart jumps in to say that it'll be very very hard for them to attract major donors. Does not expect any movie stars to jump aboard.

Author's note: lol

A NIMBY from San Benito County is here to complain about the initiative.

Says it doesn't do anything about SB10's provision on overriding local initiatives on land use, which is what her enviro group is most upset about. Says they'll probably still vote for it, but that's it.

The speaker, Mary Hsia-Coron, says that the group needs to build a coalition, but that Livable California is "perceived as a NIMBY group."

Says she's not sure if they're aware of that.

Santa Cruz NIMBY Lira Filippini is here to share concerns about the perception that Livable California and local groups like hers are NIMBYs. Says it's a huge thing to be up against.

Says they need better marketing to prove they aren't NIMBYs.

L m a o.

Lira Filippini says that all these bills are unconstitutional and that the only they've moved forward is because California has declared a housing emergency.

Says that California has "way too much" market-rate housing. Thinks we need to look at what's *really* going on here.

A NIMBY can't figure out why being known as NIMBYs might be a turnoff to other people

John Heath, a proponent and filier of the local control initiative, says that YIMBYs are "coming to take our land."

Then says the YIMBYs are "mostly our kids" and that if they sit down and talk with us, we'll realize we're being "pimped" by developers.

Whew.

Someone claims YIMBY are powered by angry renters, and it's hard to disagree with that!

Jeffrey Schwartz from affluent Bay Area suburb of Saratoga says they need to keep their eyes on the prize of restoring local control of land-use, not focus on other things like affordable housing.

Says this is a response to "the war on single-family housing" across the state.

Jeff says that the other side will say we're racist, that they're hurting minorities. Thinks this will be the strongest attack.

Says his own read of this is that SB9 and SB10 are the real racism.

Once again: whew.

Hell yeah, our last comment is from Palo Alto Councilmember Lydia Kou!

Says this isn't about "racism or segregation," it's about how upzoning has driven up prices in low-income areas, like Vancouver and SoHo.

Says this has *nothing* to do with racism.

Incredible.

Councilmember Kou continues: the YIMBYs will try to drag you back into history. It has nothing to do with what's happening today. It isn't about racism. It's about developer shills, and lining their pockets.

Author's note: m'am, you are literally a real estate agent!

Is allowing folks to build duplexes on their own personal property authoritarian?

Some people seem to think so!

Rick does one more plea for fundraising, and we're done!

There were hundreds of comments in the chat today, so I likely missed some gems. Will make a thread on those at some point.

As always, thanks to everyone for coming on this wild ride with me. See you in two weeks!