Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Chris Elmendorf Profile picture
Chris Elmendorf
@CSElmendorf
The law prof at UC Davis, not the developer in San Diego. Dad. Denizen of San Francisco. Patron of Amtrak. Tweets are my own, not statements of UC. (he/him)
2 subscribers
Aug 21 • 7 tweets • 3 min read
The sick irony:
- L.A. started out on right foot w/ its housing element
- then L.A. produced an *awful* rezoning program + faux analysis to implement it
- now L.A. is telling the Legislature, "don't pass SB 79 unless it exempts cities w/ approved housing elements"

1/6 This @TernerHousing post explains what L.A. did right initially, ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-p….

The key move was to reasonably account for sites probability of development during the planning period & discount nominal site capacity accordingly.

x.com/CSElmendorf/st…

/2
Aug 15 • 11 tweets • 5 min read
Very pleased that my paper w/ @ClaytonNall & @stan_okl, "The Folk Economics of Housing," has been published in the excellent new JEP symposium on housing markets. ⤵️

🧵/10. Image link:

The tl,dr is that housing supply skepticism--which we operationalize as the belief that a large, positive, exogenous regional supply shock would not reduce home prices / rents locally--is pervasive, distinctive to housing, but weakly held.

/2 aeaweb.org/articles?id=10…Image
Jul 25 • 16 tweets • 5 min read
Just read @vincent_rollet's incredible paper on effects of upzoning in NYC.

Wow, wow, wow!

If CA were a well-governed state, we'd be offering Meta-like pay to bring folks like Vincent into @California_HCD & @Cal_LCI.

🧵/16, with the highlights. Vincent develops a parcel-level, gen-equilibrium model of development in NYC, accounting for parcel traits like size/value of existing uses, & estimating n'hood & endogenous amenities, wages, builder cost function, extensive & intensive margins of the redevelopment decision.

/2
Jul 24 • 25 tweets • 7 min read
Here's the first of my two essays for @NiskanenCenter's "party of abundance" series. ⤵️

In the piece, @ProfSchleich & I argue that big-city YIMBYs should endeavor to forge a cross-issue, party-like faction & drive an urban quality of life agenda.

@GrowSF is the model.
🧵/24 The immediate response of many has been, "That's crazy! It's hard enough to win on housing."

/2
Jul 15 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
Inspired by this great pod ⤵️ , in which another nationally prominent progressive says, "of course I agree w/ state & local YIMBYs on 99% of their agenda," here's a seven-item test. 🧵.

1/10 For each policy choice, state whether (A) or (B) is closer to your own views, even if neither one is exactly right.

/2
Jul 3 • 22 tweets • 6 min read
CA deserves its moment in the sun, but journalists should be paying more attention to the amazing Abundance policies -- and better Democratic politics -- of our neighbors to the north.

Washington State is killing it. Oregon's doing pretty well too.

🧵/20. Three examples:

1⃣ Wash. State rid itself of project-level enviro reviews of urban housing on a 97-3 vote, via normal leg process.

In CA, it required a daring gambit by @GavinNewsom, tying enviro review reform to budget.

/2

Jul 3 • 26 tweets • 6 min read
"Can you put a rough number on how much California's CEQA reforms will increase housing production?"

I've gotten this Q from lots of journalists over the last 48 hours (who sound frustrated w/ my answer), so here's a 🧵 laying out my thinking about it.

1/25 tl, dr: @GavinNewsom was right to call AB 130/SB 131 "the most consequential housing reform in modern history in the state of California" -- but even so, there's no defensible way to give a quantitative "this much more housing" answer to the reporters' question.

/2
Jun 28 • 26 tweets • 6 min read
An update on California's CEQA / housing package as we hurtle toward the finish line.

tldr: @BuffyWicks's CEQA infill exemption is now *even better* than the 6/24 draft ⤵️; and it looks like @Scott_Wiener will land most of the fish in SB 607 but not the real lunker.

🧵/25 The million dollar (million unit?) question about Wicks's infill exemption has always been, "Will labor unions extract wage concessions that render the bill ineffective?"

/2
Jun 26 • 15 tweets • 4 min read
For years, California environmentalists have been MIA or worse on an absolute no-brainer of green policy: building dense housing near transit.

Are changes afoot? ⤵️

Maybe! But @NRDC's SB 79 support letter also shows persistence of addled Groups-blob thinking.

🧵/14. First, some context:

- How I came to be an environmentalist without a home in the environmental movement,


/2
Jun 25 • 17 tweets • 4 min read
Further thoughts on the construction-wage provisions of AB 140, the @BuffyWicks & @GavinNewsom budget trailer bill.

🧵/17. As a matter of principle, I *do not* support industry-specific, let alone task-specific, wage requirements.

I've tweeted that so-called "prevailing wage" rules are the Democratic Party's version of crony capitalism.

/2 Image
Jun 25 • 16 tweets • 4 min read
Joe C. points out that CA housing trailer bill also modifies the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA) in important ways.

I see the PSA provisions as a work in progress, whose ultimate payoff (if any) will depend on future legislative & judicial tinkering. 🧵/15

x.com/CohenSite/stat… x.com/CSElmendorf/st…Image
Image The big idea of the PSA is that if a city doesn't approve or deny a project w/in defined period of time, the project becomes "automatically approved" by operation of law.

However, opponents can attack it in court if project didn't comply w/ applicable rules.

/2
Jun 25 • 19 tweets • 5 min read
Big news from CA: new budget "trailer bill" will effect biggest CEQA reforms ever (should it pass), and points toward plausibly workable detente between key labor unions & housing developers.

Kudos to @BuffyWicks, @GavinNewsom & @cayimby.

🧵/18 Image The bill marries @BuffyWicks's AB 609, a clean CEQA exemption for infill housing, w/ new labor standards & tribal consultation rules.

The labor standards and tribal rules are different--and much better--than those of other recent CA housing laws.

/2

May 29 • 17 tweets • 5 min read
Does U.S. Supreme Court's big new NEPA decision have implications for CEQA?

Yes!

The liberals' (!) concurring opinion strongly reinforces an argument that @TDuncheon & I made for judicially narrowing the scope of CEQA review of housing projects.

🧵/16 Image
Image Current convention under CEQA prescribe analysis of the "effects" of a project as a whole, relative to a no-project (a/k/a status-quo, a/k/a current-conditions) baseline.

/2
May 17 • 18 tweets • 5 min read
Worth taking a moment to observe just how far the politics of CEQA reform have shifted over the last 3 years.

A timeline 🧵.

1/15 - spring 2022: CEQA ruling blocks UC Berkeley from expanding enrollment. Met w/ outrage, but Leg musters only very narrow fix.

/2

courthousenews.com/legislature-pa…
May 7 • 5 tweets • 3 min read
City of L.A. is swinging for the fences w/ demurrer to YIMBY lawsuit challenging adequacy of housing element rezoning.

I think city will lose at this stage, but its demurrer does illustrate a real problem w/ manner in which cities & HCD implement the Housing Element Law.
1/5 Image L.A. argues that *none* of its housing element commitments is enforceable, owing to HE's prefatory description of programs/deadlines as aspirational.

(L.A. concedes it must rezone by statutory deadline, but insists it needn't do any specific rezoning actions listed in HE.)
2/5 Image
Image
Image
May 7 • 18 tweets • 7 min read
This ⤵️ is an outstanding post from @mattyglesias on benefits of concentrated land ownership for urbanism and the renewal of downtowns.

My addenda follow below. 🧵/17 Matt's core point is that developers' incentive to invest in amenities like beautiful design, quality public space, and gathering places like coffee shops & bars is increasing in the share of the neighborhood that the developer owns.

/2 Image
May 5 • 23 tweets • 10 min read
After reading @GaneshSitaraman & Chris Serkin's "Post-Neoliberal Housing Policy" alongside @ezraklein's interview of @ZephyrTeachout & @saikatc, I think I'm finally starting to understand the crux of the Left's vehement reaction to Abundance.

🧵/22 Image
Image Each camp offers a diagnosis of the Democratic Party's predicament + a way out. I'd summarize it thus:

- Team Abundance: Improve blue-state governance. Attract new residents. Make voters elsewhere want their state (and nation!) to be more like California, New York, Illinois.

/2 Image
Mar 27 • 15 tweets • 3 min read
Here's a follow-up 🧵w/ highlights from the rest of the Fast Track Housing Package.

- @MattHaneySF's AB 1294 requires all local govs to accept a single, uniform, state-issued application for housing development projects. An excellent pro-competition policy.

1/14 - @AsmLoriDWilson's AB 660 authorizes third-party review of building permit applications (by licensed engineer) if city flubs shot-clock deadlines. An important self-help remedy and alternative to litigation.

- @JoshHooverCA's AB 1308 similarly authorizes third-party...

/2
Mar 23 • 16 tweets • 5 min read
Proposition: Abundance and the conservationist mode of environmentalism are (or should be) friends, not enemies.
🧵/15. Image There's a widespread view that Abundance squares w/ environmentalism only insofar as climate supersedes conservation as the Big Issue for enviros.

Tradeoffs b/t conservation & green energy give rise to a "Greens' Dilemma."
/2 Image
Mar 11 • 17 tweets • 5 min read
Even if CA enacts this amazing set of bills ⤵️, there are big challenges ahead.

I see six areas of concern on the horizon. 🧵/16. Concern #1. Local political incentives.

Ditching public hearings on housing proposals ("ministerial approval") is good, but it doesn't give city council members any affirmative reason to facilitate -- or simply not obstruct -- development.

/2
Mar 11 • 17 tweets • 6 min read
It's exciting to see the public-intellectual drumbeat around "Abundance" manifest in this year's crop of California housing bills.

They're far more ambitious--and promising--than anything I've seen previously. 🧵/17 Image
Image
Image
Image #1: CEQA reform that's broad, deep, and clean.

@Scott_Wiener's SB 607:
- authorizes admin mapping of good-for-infill areas & greatly simplifies CEQA review of housing in those areas (in line with the recommendations of this...

/2
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavC…