Groups Awaken to Quadruple Density Bill in Sacramento

Bill Pearl

Dismayed by continued City Hall silence on a Sacramento bill that would enable quadruple density in single family home neighborhoods, a number of Long Beach groups and residents – to our knowledge for the first time in recent Long Beach neighborhood activism – have participated in Sacramento legislative proceedings to oppose the measure.

Groups that submitted written testimony in opposition include the El Dorado Park South Neighborhood Association and the Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association. Groups testifying telephonically include Corliss Lee’s Eastside Voice, Carlos Ovalle’s People of Long Beach and veteran NLB community advocate Laurie Angel speaking for her neighborhood group. 

Their awakening now provides an independent Long Beach voice in Sacramento regardless of what City Hall does or doesn’t do.

SB 9 would allow a lot split of single family home parcels and plus an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on each of the split lots, creating four dwelling units where one residence stood.

Livable California has called SB 9 “an unprecedented experiment that invites speculators and big investors to disrupt home ownership and harm the stability of 21M Californians.” SB 9 supporters say SB 9 is a “modest” [their term] increase in density to deal with California’s housing crisis, combats sprawl that fuels global warming and addresses past racial discrimination they say is reflected in present single family home zoning.

On April 12, Long Beach City Hall’s Government Affairs Manager, Dr. Tyler Curley, said the city hasn’t taken a position on SB 9 “at this time [since] it’s still early in the legislative session [and] we continue to monitor these bills as they’re amended through the committee process.”

On April 15, the state Senate Housing Committee voted 7-2 to advance SB 9 with state Senator Tom Umberg (D, SE LB-west OC) voting “yes.” SB 9 now includes amendments its authors say address previous objections; opponents disagree.

Corliss Lee’s grassroots Eastside Voice opposes SB 9 (after opposing its nearly identical predecessor SB 1120 which came within minutes of a midnight deadline for 2020 passage.) Lee used her email list and social networks to spread the word on SB 9’s advance.

On April 19, the El Dorado Park South Neighborhood Association emailed the state Senate’s Governance and Finance Committee a written statement in opposition to SB 9. The Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association also submitted written testimony in opposition. By their simple actions, the groups joined multiple cities – including Signal Hill and Lakewood – various organizations and neighborhood groups statewide listed in the Committee’s official legislative analysis opposed to SB 9:

Opposition: Adams Hill Neighborhood Association; Aids Healthcare Foundation; Alameda Citizens Task Force; Albany Neighbors United; Belmont, City of; Berkeley Associated Neighbors Against Non-affordable Housing; Berkeley Flatlanders Group; Blue Dove Neighborhood; Brea, City of; Burton Valley Neighborhoods Group; California Alliance of Local Electeds; California Cities for Local Control; California Contract Cities Association; Century Glen Hoa; Cherrywood Leimert Park Block Club; Chino Hills, City of; Chino, City of; Citizens Preserving Venice; Cities olf Arcata, Azusa; Bellflower; Beverly Hills; Brentwood; Burbank; Camarillo; Carpinteria; Carson; Cerritos; Chino; Clayton; Clearlake; Clovis; Colton; Corona; Cypress; Diamond Bar; Dorris; Downey; Eastvale; Fortuna; Foster City; Fountain Valley; Garden Grove; Glendora; Grand Terrace; Hesperia; Hidden Hills; Inglewood City Hall; Irvine; Irwindale; Kerman; King; La Palma; La Quinta; La Verne; Laguna Beach; Laguna Niguel; Lakeport; Lancaster; Los Alamitos; Los Altos; Lomita; Martinez; Menifee; Monterey; Moorpark; Murrieta; Newport Beach; Norwalk; Novato; Oakdale; Ontario; Orinda; Palos Verdes Estates; Paramount; Pismo Beach; Poway; Rancho Cucamonga; Rancho Palos Verdes; Rancho Santa Margarita; Redding; Redondo Beach; Rohnert Park; San Dimas; San Jacinto; San Marcos; San Marino; Santa Clara; Santa Clarita; Saratoga; Signal Hill; South Pasadena; Sunnyvale; Thousand Oaks; Torrance; Tracy; Vacaville; Vista; Westlake Village; Whittier; Yorba Linda; College Terrace Residents Association; Commitee to Save the Hollywoodland Specific Plan; Community Associations Institute - California Legislative Action Committee; Comstock Hills Homeowners Association; Craftsman Village Historic District; Cupertino, City of; Deward; Dublin, City of; Durand Ridge United; El Dorado Park South Neighborhood Association - Long Beach; El Segundo, City of; Escalon City; Half Moon Bay, City of; Hidden Hill Community Association; Hills 2000 Friends of The Hills; Hollywood Knolls Community Club; Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association; Irwindale, City of; LA Brea Hancock Homeowners Association; Lafayette Homeowners Association; Lafayette; Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association; Las Virgenes-malibu Council of Governments; Latino Alliance for Community Engagement; League of California Cities; Linda Vista-Annandale Association; Livable Pasadena; Lomita; Los Altos Residents Los Angeles County Division, League of California Cities; Los Feliz Improvement Association; Mccmc; Merced, City of; Miracle Mile Residential Association; Mission Street Neighbors; Mission Viejo; Montecito Association; Neighborhood Council Sustainability Alliance Trees Committee; New Livable California Dba Livable California; Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica; Pacific Palisades Community Council; Palo Alto, City of; Pismo Beach, City of; Placentia, City of; Pleasanton, City of; Rancho Cucamonga, City of; Resident Information Resource of Santa Monica; Residents of 47th Avenue; Riviera Homeowners Association; S.B. Residents for Responsible Development; San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments; Santa Clarita; Santa Monica Coalition for A Livable City ; Save Lafayette; Seaside Neighborhood Association; Shadow Hills Property Owners Association; Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association; South Bay Cities Council of Governments; South Bay Residents; Southshores Homeowners Association; Stanton; Sunnyvale United Neighbors; Sunsetparkside Education and Action Committee; Sustainable Tamalmonte; Temecula; Temecula Valley Neighborhood Coalition; Town of Apple Valley; Town of Colma; Town of Fairfax; Town of Mammoth Lakes; Town of Ross; United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles; Ventura Council of Governments; Ventura, City of; Verdugo Woodlands West Homeowners Association; West Pasadena Residents’ Association; West Torrance Homeowners Association; Westside Regional Alliance of Councils; Westwood Highland Homeowners Association; Westwood Hills Property Owners Association; Westwood Homeowners Association; Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition; Windsor Square Association; Yorba Linda, City of; Hundred Individuals.

SB 9’s supporters include “Long Beach Yimby” (among several Yes in My Backyard groups statewide), the Mayors of San Diego, Oakland and Sacramento and advocacy groups including the Cal Chamber. SB 9’s supporters are listed in the Committee’s legislative analysis are:

Support: Darrell Steinberg- Mayor, Sacramento; Jon Wizard - Councilmember, City of Seaside; Libby Schaaf, Mayor, City of Oakland; Todd Gloria, Mayor, City of San Diego; Zach Hilton, City Council Member, City of Gilroy; AARP; Abundant Housing LA; Adu Task Force East Bay; All Home; American Planning Association, California Chapter; Bay Area Council; Bridge Housing Corporation; Cal Chamber; California Yimby; Casita Coalition; Cbia; Chan Zuckerberg Initiative; Circulate San Diego; City of Marywood; East Bay for Everyone; Facebook, INC.; Fieldstead and Company, INC.; Generation Housing; Greenbelt Alliance; Habitat for Humanity California; Hello Housing; Housing Action Coalition; Local Government Commission; Long Beach Yimby; Los Angeles Business Council; Midpen Housing; Midpen Housing Corporation; Modular Building Institute; Monterey; County of; Mountain View Yimby; National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals; Non-profit Housing Association of Northern California; North Bay Leadership Council; Northern Neighbors; Peninsula for Everyone; People for Housing - Orange County; San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce; San Fernando Valley Yimby; San Francisco Yimby; Sand Hill Property Company; Santa Cruz Yimby; Share Sonoma County; Silicon Valley Leadership Group; South Bay Yimby; South Pasadena Residents for Responsible Growth; Spur; Streets for People Bay Area; Sv@home; Techequity Collaborative; Tent Makers; Terner Center for Housing Innovation At the University of California, Berkeley; The Two Hundred; Tmg Partners; United Way of Greater Los Angeles; Urban Environmentalists; Yimby Action; Yimby Democrats of San Diego County; Zillow Group

On April 22, Ms. Lee on behalf of the Eastside Voice, Carlos Ovalle on behalf of his citywide policy group People of Long Beach, and Laurie Angel on behalf of her sizable NLB neighborhood group, participated by telephone testimony opposing voicing opposition to SB 9 in the Governance and Finance Committee’s hearing.

With the City of Long Beach silent, the Committee voted 5-0 (including the Committee’s sole Republican, Jim Nielsen (R, Roseville-Chico) to advance SB 9 to the state Senate Appropriations Committee, one vote away from the state Senate floor. If SB 9 passes the state Senate, the process repeats in the Assembly where awakened Long Beach neighborhood groups can be heard again, perhaps joined by additional Long Beach groups.

A majority of the Long Beach City Council sets city policy, including on pending state legislation. The Council has a three-member “State Legislation Committee” that can offer recommendations to the full Council. However regardless of the Council’s State Legislation Committee, any Councilmember(s) can agendize SB 9 for City Council support or opposition.

The city’s council-approved 2021 “State Legislative Agenda” (general statements of city policy that city management is supposed to follow) recites in pertinent part that the City of Long Beach will “Oppose legislation that would reduce the city’s local land use authority” and legislation that “would reduce the city’s local land use authority and support implementation of the City Council adopted planning documents.”

Meanwhile, Lee is also watching SB 10, which would let a City Council majority approve up to 10 residential units on a single family lot in “jobs rich” areas (like ELB) or near well-served public transit. City Hall has thus far taken no position on SB 10.

Bill Pearl publishes lbreport.com, a local, online news source since August 2000.

Category:

Add new comment

Beachcomber

Copyright 2024 Beeler & Associates.

All rights reserved. Contents may not be reproduced or transmitted – by any means – without publisher's written permission.