Density Enabling Bills Pass Without City Opposition

Eastside Voice President Urges Political Payback Against Unresponsive Incumbents

On Sept. 16, two days after avoiding a recall, Governor Gavin Newsom signed two bills into law that invite increased housing density by overriding – and thus arguably eliminating – key portions of locally enacted single-family home zoning and land use in California.

SB 9 requires cities (except in state specified historic districts) to approve lot splits enabling four units on single family lots. SB 9 says newly created parcels can be no smaller than 1,200 square feet but adds: “A local agency may by ordinance adopt a smaller minimum lot size.” It also forbids cities from requiring parking to match the increased density for parcels within half mile of frequent bus/rail public transit. SB 9 was authored by state Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins (D, San Diego) joined as a co-author by former CD 1 Councilwoman, now state Senator, Lena Gonzalez (D, Long Beach/southeast LA County.)

SB 10, authored by state Senator Scott Wiener (D, San Francisco), lets a City Council majority enact an ordinance overriding locally enacted land use and zoning decisions to allow up to 10 units on single family lots within a half mile of frequent public transit.

Both bills eliminate detailed CEQA analysis, public hearing review and potential court remedies for significant neighborhood impacts of such actions.

Introduced in Dec. 2020, SB 9 and SB 10 advanced through the entire legislative process – committee hearings and floor votes in the Assembly and state Senate – without City of Long Beach opposition.

Neighborhood groups, including The Eastside Voice, El Dorado Park South Neighborhood Association, Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association, Citizens About Responsible Planning, joining statewide groups including Livable California, Neighborhoods United and dozens of cities statewide whose Councils (including Los Angeles) opposed the bills. Opponents cited neighborhood damaging density and loss of local control. Supporters cited the need to produce more housing.

For months, LB neighborhood groups pleaded with Long Beach Councilmembers to agendize the bills for discussion and opposition. Any individual councilmember could have done so “on any Tuesday.” None did.

Eastside Voice president Corliss Lee has urged political payback in response to unresponsive council incumbents in the 2022 election cycle. Lee urged voters in CDs 1 (Zendejas), 3 (Price), 5 (Mungo), 7 (Uranga) and 9 (Richardson) not to re-elect the incumbents but to replace them with neighborhood protective, reform minded councilmembers.

In CD 5, former Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske (2006-2014) opposed both bills and is challenging incumbent Stacy Mungo. In CD 7, Carlos Ovalle (a co-founder of Long Beach’s Reform Coalition) opposed SB 9 and 10 and has announced a 2022 challenge to incumbent Roberto Uranga.

Assemblyman Patrick O’Donnell (D, LB-San Pedro) voted “no” on SB 9 and 10, while Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D, NLB-Paramount) and Assemblyman Mike Gipson (D, NLB-Carson) voted for the bills on final passage. State Senator Tom Umberg (D, SE LB-west OC) joined SB co-author Gonzalez in voting “yes” on both bills. Umberg is up for re-election in 2022.

Instead of agendizing an item to oppose the bills, CD 5 incumbent Mungo agendized a late July item that sought to reframe the issue into whether the bills would or wouldn’t significantly impact Long Beach. The resulting August 25, 2021 city staff report – cited approvingly by Mungo in her “Neighborly News” newsletter – downplayed the bills’ impacts.

On August 16, prior to final Sacramento votes, SB 9’s authors made two limited amendments:

An applicant [for a lot split would have to] sign an affidavit stating that they intend to occupy one of the four-enabled housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the approval date of the urban lot split...

A city may deny a proposed housing development project if the building official “makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of [Government Code] Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact.”

Some councilmembers – two of whom (Mungo and Price) are seeking re-election in 2022 – agendized a council item belatedly urging Governor Newsom to veto the bills. On Sept. 14, their agenda item failed on a 4-5 vote (Yes: Price, Supernaw, Mungo, Austin; No: Zendejas, Allen, Saro, Uranga, Richardson.)

During the council’s Sept. 14 discussion, CD 9 incumbent Vice Mayor Rex Richardson disclosed that he’d spoken with Gov. Newsom in the past few weeks and Newsom indicated he would sign the bills. Richardson didn’t mention this while the Newsom recall was pending.

During the recall Republican candidate Larry Elder blamed CEQA for unaffordable housing costs by creating delays and impediments for housing developers but refused (in an L.A. Times interview and in response to questions emailed to his campaign by this author) to say if he would sign or veto SB 9 and 10.

Mr. Elder hasn’t ruled out a 2022 run for governor against Newsom. SB 9 and 10 will take effect on Jan. 1, 2022.

Bill Pearl is the publisher of lbreport.com, a local, online news source since August 2000.