Seems like we should post these screenshots weekly, since so many are suggesting YIMBY are “for affordable housing.”
Here’s Matthew Lewis, Comms Director of the largest dark-money-funded YIMBY lobbying group in California, the birthplace of YIMBY. @mateosfo
Matt briefly took me off block to quote tweet this, & contorted himself into justifying his classist (& racist) anti-public housing trope.
Btw @cayimby is the group that was behind the AB2053 social housing bill that was the housing equivalent of Medicare 4 All backed by Cigna.
#AB2053 was a bill so atrocious that even the Assembly’s staff said it would disproportionately benefit moderate & above moderate income & *ACCELERATE DISPLACEMENT.*
This is why we call YIMBY colonizers & settler urbanists & their efforts: Urban Renewal 2.0
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Look at the replies to understand why I call them The Proud Boys of Real Estate
Anyone who thinks to blame decades-in-the-making housing crisis on 1of11 Dem Socialist Supervisor who has been in office 3yrs & founded a statewide tenants advocacy org is insane, stupid or paid off.
Any honest observation is that San Francisco was sold off to Big Tech, commercial real estate & venture capitalists going back to at least Willie Brown’s administration.
And as South Bay cities were adding millions in creative office space for six-figure migrant tech workers…
SF didnt protect the affordable housing stock.
As a tenants rights atty & advocate, Dean & folk like him r the only reason it isnt worse for the remain SF low-income & working class.
Meanwhile SF’s tech engineer gentrifiers r famously NOT housing insecure. So y they so loud?
2. Missing middle used to mean those who make too much for public housing & not enough to buy a home. Literally the equivalent today of the 50-80% AMI.
Then it came to mean moderate income (80-120% AMI).
Now it’s just less than a tech engineer wants to pay. 🤦🏾♂️
2. We’ve seen repeatedly the promise of zoning deregulation w/o affordability requirements leading to missing middle. It’s snake oil.
We saw that with small lot subdivisions in LA a decade ago. Same w/duplex laws.
Instead what we see is the new homes more often than not selling at higher price than the initial home acquisition price, & overall hikes in sq ft prices in markets where the splitting is feasible & desirable.
YIMBY not only dont give a 💩 a/b protecting tenants (& I’ll add at-risk homeowners) ur orgs oppose every effort to do something meaningful under the claim of it interfering w/the market.
Fact is YIMBY dont want vacancy control b/c u want to occupy the urban space BIPOC live in.
All of the meaningful things to protect tenants & long-time residents could be put in place by the legislature TOMORROW to create this “make it hard to displace tenants” world a reality. And yet YIMBY don’t direct their energy towards it. AND YIMBY NEVER WILL!
Stuff just as simple to pass as a blanket upzoning:
Statewide vacancy control
High flipper taxes
Tenant Opportunity to Purchase
Ellis Act repeal
Anti-harassment ordinances
Criminal penalties for habitability violations
Etc etc w/a comparatively small amount of💰 for enforcement
Oh YIMBY know how to yell. …at the elders, BIPOC & (especially on Housing Twitter) at the women who dare to point out how the blanket zoning deregulation policies lead to their eviction.
Lest we forget head YIMBY putting elders in the hospital pushing #SB827 🧵
Hard to not see that the Ca statewide ban on parking minimums #AB2097 convo is a reflection of typical shortcomings of white urbanists, and in particular their absence of understanding of equity & race, and refusal to see obvious conflicts with their urbanists dreams. 🧵
While white urbanists & politicians claim the bill advances equity, the actual anti-poverty orgs w/decades standing up for the low-income and people of color are saying different.
Here’s from the Western Center on Law & Poverty, Public Interest Law Project & CRLA Fndn:
“When AB 2097 passed the Assembly as well as Senate policy committees, it required that housing development projects of 40 or more units include affordable units in exchange for being relieved of complying with minimum parking standard…” #AB2097
And weird (but understandable) to see Garcetti carrying our flag.
#AB2097 eliminates the lone (paltry, flawed but better than nothing) optional inclusionary zoning policy (around transit stops) that exists for the 99% of CA cities.
Calling this a win for equity is insulting.
This is the result of a well-funded campaign to deregulate housing development & thereby ANY POSSIBLE LEVERAGE locals have to push speculative/for-profit market-rate developers to be slightly responsive to the current need for affordable & mod-income housing.