PROFIT and AFFORDABILITY

WILL THIS FIX THE SHORTAGE OF LOW-INCOME HOUSING? 

NO. About 39% of the housing is supposed to be low and very low income. Even with section 8 vouchers, these units will produce a loss for developers. Most projects will be by private builders and investment consortiums (on land picked for them by localities). There are no requirements to add low-income housing, just some pot-sweeteners (called "bonuses") if they do. Developers can negotiate with cities desperate to get projects started. Recently, the threshold for low-income units was reduced from 25% to 20% for a project in Corte Madera.

www.marinij.com/2022/05/25/corte-madera-eases-affordability-rules-to-spur-construction/

WILL THIS LOWER THE PRICE OF RENT OR HOME BUYING?

NO. The price of land, materials, labor and the rise in interest rates will be factored in. It just produces more housing for those who can afford it. The whole housing market mania is just a win for investment developers, who are largely responsible for the skyrocketing home prices, as they buy up assets and take them off the market. 

ARE THE HOUSING MANDATE NUMBERS ASSIGNED FAIRLY? 

NO. Big cities are where increases can be absorbed, with supporting transportation and infrastructure. The large developments are intended to create density in areas with quality transit and other services. 

But small towns are to be loaded with density too, regardless of constraints. In Mill Valley, for example, the narrow, windy roads were built by the logging industry in the late 1800s, for horses. The evacuation infrastructure cannot be expanded. Adding density there puts thousands at risk in case of fire.

ARE THE NUMBERS ACCURATE?

NO According to the audit. The HCD has not been able to show methodology. AUDIT ongoing, now at California Department of Finance (CDF). See Links at right.

WAS FIRE DANGER CONSIDERED?

VETO: Safety was deliberately prevented in Newsom’s SB 182 VETO (would have required evacuation routes for new construction) This the link to his comment; to sum up, it would slow the housing: 

https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SB-182.pdf   

SIGNED INTO LAW: SB 1292, which deliberately discourages trying to avoid building in hazard zones https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20212022/SB1292/   

It states that for every unit NOT built in a hazardous area, TWO must be built elsewhere else, in its place. 

BLOOMBERG COMMENT: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/wildfire-safety-bill-for-new-developments-vetoed-in-california 

IS THERE A PENALTY IF NUMBERS AREN'T MET? 

YES State can issue severe fines and put city into receivership. State decides what public lands will be given to developers, so they continue building housing. Takes over locality's zoning process completely, and all residential projects become by right and subject to ministerial (instant) approval. CEQA is waived. Zero local input. Fines up to $10,000 per day, up to $100,000 per month, plus loss of state funds. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB215

IS THIS 2.5 MILLION EVEN POSSIBLE?  

NO. Every developer in the state will be competing to get materials in short supply (driving prices higher) to build those 2.5 million units. Labor costs and interest rates are rising, and water is becoming scarcer.  https://wolfstreet.com/2022/04/26/sales-of-new-houses-sag-inventory-piles-up-to-highest-since-2008-as-mortgage-rates-spike-homebuilder-costs-explode-amid-shortages-of-all-kinds/  

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/ca-housing-crisis-investigation/2879921/ Housing