Anonymous user
SB827: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
imported>Jhestia No edit summary |
imported>Tmccormick No edit summary |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 2:
[[File:1965-Market-Street-Rendering-2017-85-feet.jpg|thumb|right|500px|85-feet height 1965 Market St, San Francisco]]
'''SB 827''' (Senate Bill 827, "Transit-rich Housing Bonus") is proposed [[California_legislation_2018|2018 California state legislation]] that would '''encourage high-density housing development
#85 feet buildings, on streets within 1/4 mile of a major transit stop, or stop on a high quality transit corridors, that are wider (70' or more between property lines).
#55 feet, on less wide streets.
#55 feet, on streets within 1/2 mile of major transit but not meeting (a), on wider streets (70' or more between property lines).
#45 feet, on less wide streets.
'''Allows up to 105' feet (estimated) if combined with Density Bonus law'''
The bonus granted by SB827 could also, in many cases, be combined with a state or local [[California_State_Density_Bonus_Law|Density Bonus]], which typically allows an additional 20% or 2 stories height. As a common rule of thumb, buildings are about 10 feet per floors ('story'). Therefore if buildings use both SB827 and Density Bonus, they could in theory be allowed ''from around 65 to 105 feet, or 6-10 stories''.
== Summary ==
[[File:Joe-Rivano-Barros-SB827-SF-map.jpg|thumb|right|400px|tweet by Joe Rivano Barros on SB 827]]A housing development would be eligible for a transit-rich housing bonus
*A) if within one-quarter mile radius of a major transit stop or stop on a high-quality transit corridor:
**85 feet, or
**55 feet if any side of the parcel faces a street less than 70 feet wide from property line to property line.
*B) if within one-half mile of a major transit stop, but not meeting (A):
**55 feet, or
**45 feet, if any side of the parcel faces a street less than 70 feet wide from property line to property line.
“'''High-quality transit corridor'''” means a corridor with fixed route bus service that has service intervals of no more than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
“'''Major transit stop'''” has the same meaning as defined in [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=21064.3.&lawCode=PRC Section 21064.3] of the Public Resources Code:
<blockquote>"a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods."</blockquote>
The bill text proposes to add a new Section 65917.7 to California Government Code Chapter 4.3, "Density Bonuses and Other Incentives". It would create a new "transit-rich housing" bonus -- analogous to the existing [[California_State_Density_Bonus_Law|California "Density Bonus" [DB]]] which gives housing developers certain inventives/exemptions in exchange for including a portion of [[Affordable_housing|below-market units]] in the project.
[http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=65917 Section 65917] of Code Chapter 4.3 requires that "incentives offered by the city, county, or city and county pursuant to this chapter shall contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of lower income housing in proposed housing developments." It is unclear whether the proposed "transit-rich housing bonus" would qualify as a "density bonus" which already has specified affordability requirements; or if the bill may be revised to qualify so or to add specific affordability requirements.<br/> ''[update 7 Jan 2017: [https://twitter.com/hanlonbt/status/950155791268429824 clarification] on that point from Brian Hanlon of bill sponsor California YIMBY: "Those negotiations are forthcoming."]. ''
Title: SB-827 Planning and zoning: transit-rich housing bonus.(2017-2018)
Summary from Legislative Counsel's Digest (in [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB827 bill text]):
"The Planning and Zoning Law requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents.<br/> <br/> "This bill would authorize a transit-rich housing project to receive a transit-rich housing bonus. The bill would define a transit-rich housing project as a residential development project the parcels of which are all within a 1/2 mile radius of a major transit stop or a 1/4 mile radius of a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are further defined. The bill would exempt a project awarded a housing opportunity bonus from various requirements, including maximum controls on residential density or floor area ratio, minimum automobile parking requirements, design standards that restrict the applicant’s ability to construct the maximum number of units consistent with any applicable building code, and maximum height limitations, as provided.<br/> <br/> The bill would declare that its provisions address a matter of statewide concern and apply equally to all cities and counties in this state, including a charter city."
The bill would create the transit-rich housing bous as new California Government Code sub-section 65917.7, thus within Chapter 4.3, "Density Bonuses and Other Incentives." The required purpose of such incentives anywhere in this Chapter is "contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of lower income housing." according to Section 65917.
<blockquote>In enacting this chapter it is the intent of the Legislature that the density bonus or other incentives offered by the city, county, or city and county pursuant to this chapter shall contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of lower income housing in proposed housing developments. In the absence of an agreement by a developer in accordance with Section 65915, a locality shall not offer a density bonus or any other incentive that would undermine the intent of this chapter."</font><br/> ''[http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=65917 - http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=65917]''</blockquote>
== Resources (maps etc) ==
=== [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB827 Bill text]. ===
=== [[SB827.info]] ===
resource provided by bill sponsor California YIMBY to show estimated impacts from bill.
=== UrbanFootprint ===
analysis of SB827 zoming impact, by this land-use mapping service.
=== <br/> TransitRichHousing.org - Sasha Aickin's map showing areas where zoning would be affected ===
Line 31 ⟶ 82:
== Supporters ==
=== Bill sponsors ===
*State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) - principal author
*State Senator Nancy Skinner (D-Alameda Co). - Principal coauthor
*State Assembly Member Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) - Principal coauthor
=== YIMBY groups ===
*California YIMBY (bill primary sponsor and co-writer)
*California YIMBY Tech Network (coalition of tech executives and investors). <br/> [https://cayimby.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/SB-827-Tech-Network-Letter.pdf Support letter, January 24, 2018].
*YIMBY Action
*East Bay for Everyone
*YIMBY San Diego Democracts
*probably, more or less all YIMBY-identifiying groups
=== San Francisco Chronicle. ===
see San Francisco Chronicle [Editorial Board]. "[https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-California-s-housing-wars-just-12511603.php Editorial: California’s housing wars just starting]." January 19, 2018. <br/>
== Support with amend ==
Line 50 ⟶ 109:
=== TransForm ===
Line 78 ⟶ 135:
Letter, 9 February 2018: "[http://www.cityofmillvalley.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=28305 RE: Notice of Opposition: 2018 Housing Legislation Targeted at Local Communities, including SB 827 and SB 828]"<br/>
=== Los Angeles Times ===
see Los Angeles Times [Editorial Board]. "[http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-housing-near-transit-20180123-story.html Yes, California needs taller, denser development near transit. But not at the expense of affordable housing]." 23 Jan 2018.
"By setting blanket height and density increases statewide, the bill, as currently written, could eliminate key affordable housing incentives and protections designed to reduce displacement in gentrifying neighborhoods.
"After voters passed Measure JJJ in November 2016, the city enacted a Transit Oriented Communities incentive program that encourages developers to build taller, denser projects (and with less parking) near transit stops — if the developer includes affordable housing. The policy also requires developers to replace any affordable units they demolish in the course of building new projects.
"That program would be undermined by SB 827, which would upzone land around transit stops for any residential development, even if it did not include affordable housing. That's a concern because the development of rail lines and the opening of new stations can often spur gentrification and displacement. Yet low-income workers are three times more likely to ride transit than wealthier workers, who are more likely to own cars and drive.
"California clearly needs to make it easier to build housing. And it makes sense to concentrate new housing near mass transit to encourage people to get around without cars. Surely lawmakers can come up with legislation to push cities to approve taller, more dense housing near transit without completely overriding local control or undermining existing efforts to incentivize the building of affordable housing."<br/>
=== Act-LA (Alliance for Community Transit-Los Angeles) and 36 co-signers - Feb 12th ===
Line 83 ⟶ 152:
[http://allianceforcommunitytransit.org/ http://allianceforcommunitytransit.org/]
Opposition letter (Feb 12): [https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-HoGZWp3E4tNTc1dF9VY3NsTjg4TV9BeTRjSWxJQ0xUc0hN/view. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-HoGZWp3E4tNTc1dF9VY3NsTjg4TV9BeTRjSWxJQ0xUc0hN/view
Letter co-signers:
Line 135 ⟶ 204:
"If SB 827 passes, we will lose these incentives for developers to include low-income, very-low income or extremely low-income units in their new buildings near transit. Likewise, provisions in the above cited plans and policies to prevent destruction of affordable units, require replacement of affordable units and mitigate displacement of low-income families would be undermined. The result is that existing rent-stabilized units will be put at even greater risk of destruction, and core transit riders at greater risk of displacement.
"If SB 827 passes, we stand to lose out on tens of thousands of affordable homes near transit and we are putting families who depend on rent stabilization at greater risk of displacement at a time of severe housing and homelessness crises."<br/>
=== Los Angeles City Council ===
=== Democratic Socialists of America - LA, San Diego, SF, Sacramento - join statement ===
Democratic Socialists of America, Los Angeles chapter (lead author). "[http://www.dsa-la.org/statement_in_opposition_to_sb_827 Statement in Opposition to SB827 - Luxury Development for the Rich, Displacement and Dispossession for the Poor.]" March 22, 2018. http://www.dsa-la.org/statement_in_opposition_to_sb_827.
<blockquote>
''"SUMMARY:<br/> The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) Los Angeles Housing & Homelessness Committee, San Diego Housing & Homelessness Working Group, San Francisco Housing Committee and Climate & Environmental Justice Committee, and Sacramento Housing Committee oppose the proposed state-level legislation Senate Bill 827. Despite the most recent amendments (as of March 1, 2018), the bill continues to put forth a flawed market-based, trickle-down approach to housing production and allocation — predicated on the actions of developers and landowners whose profits depend on scarcity, class inequality, and racial injustice. We believe that this bill will intensify gentrification and displacement, and thus we join a growing movement of [https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-HoGZWp3E4tNTc1dF9VY3NsTjg4TV9BeTRjSWxJQ0xUc0hN/view progressive grassroots organizations] across the state that criticize SB 827.''
''"We support building denser, greener cities for the many, not the few. We agree that apartment construction in affluent single-family-home neighborhoods would be a step in the right direction, especially if such development were truly affordable to low-income people. But this is not what this bill will accomplish. Instead, SB 827 will result in luxury housing exclusively for the wealthy while [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-rosenthal-transit-gentrification-metro-ridership-20180220-story.html displacing] and dispossessing the poor and working class.''
''"We are glad that Senator Wiener has acknowledged concerns about displacement with his recent amendments. We are especially heartened to see the provision to ban demolition of all renter-occupied housing for SB 827 projects unless a [https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/sb-827-amendments-strengthening-demolition-displacement-protections-4ced4c942ac9 Right to Remain guarantee] is provided, which includes moving and rental costs throughout the construction period.''
''However, it is imperative to understand that destroying units is not the only way individuals and families are uprooted from their communities, and the recent amendments do not address this. Luxury developments in low-income neighborhoods lead to indirect displacement by incentivizing nearby property owners to raise rents to levels that are unaffordable to existing tenants. The key phenomenon remaking cities across America is that formerly redlined neighborhoods are now overrun by a flood of [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/08/17/tenants-under-siege-inside-new-york-city-housing-crisis/ racialized investment capital] meant to redevelop those areas for affluent, predominantly white residents. New housing is built at the high end of the market not to bring working-class people of color in, but to shut them out.''
''"We need policies that match the scale of the crisis and that guarantee housing as a human right. One major priority must be [http://www.dsa-la.org/statement_on_costa_hawkins_repeal repealing Costa-Hawkins] and expanding rent control and other tenant protections. This would provide immediate relief for millions of renters across the state, prevent thousands more from being forced into homelessness, and stabilize vulnerable communities of color. We also demand the decriminalization of homelessness and immediate shelter for the [http://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/plans-reports/docs/California's-Housing-Future-Main-Document-Draft.pdf 118,000 unhoused residents across the state], whether it come via emergency housing construction or rental subsidies. Finally, we demand aggressive state and local investment in public housing.''
''Ultimately, any actual solution to our crisis requires a radical redistribution of land and resources, facilitating the construction of decommodified housing on a massive scale. Let’s move beyond the trickle-down approach of “Yes In My Backyard” (YIMBY) to policies that truly guarantee housing as a human right, demanding “Public Housing In My Backyard” (PHIMBY).''
</blockquote>
Line 331 ⟶ 386:
*World Health Organization: Health Effects of Transport Related Air Pollution, 2005 states:<br/> "There is evidence that implicates ambient air pollution in adverse effects on pregnancy, birth outcomes and male fertility. Modelled studies on exposure to traffic-related air pollutants suggest that they are a risk factor for adverse birth outcomes. <br/> [http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/74715/E86650.pdf http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/74715/E86650.pdf]
<span style="font-size:larger
SB827 would result in concentrating development around transit corridors and hubs. Typically these locations are immediately adjacent to freeways and major roads. SB827 goes so far as to increase height limits for more major roads - raising the height limit to 85 feet where development is adjacent to roads 45 feet or wider.
Line 445 ⟶ 500:
=== Preserve local demolition controls ===
[note, this is arguably implicit in bill, since bill does not address or override them].
Dennis Richards @PlnCom_Richards [https://twitter.com/PlnCom_Richards/status/962378559837822976 9:31 AM - 10 Feb 2018]<br/> Replying to @MBridegam<br/> "If nothing is specifically written in SB827 about respecting local demolition controls it’s the Hoising Accountability Act that will override any demolition controls SF has caused by the upzoning through SB827."
Dennis Richards @PlnCom_Richards 9:54 AM - 10 Feb 2018<br/> Replying to @marymcnamara @MBridegam<br/> "My personal opinion is that we need the clear deference to local demolition controls in SB827 which extends to all other state housing legislation. That’s what’s being promised as I understand it in this bill. Having it in SB827 but not the HAA makes it useless."
marymcnamara @marymcnamara 10:07 AM - 10 Feb 2018<br/> Replying to @PlnCom_Richards @MBridegam<br/> "This seems to speak (I think) to my concern about a possible fatal flaw in SB827. That even if demolition control language is built into SB827, the Housing Accountability Act circumvents?"
YIMBYwiki @YIMBYwiki<br/> Replying to @PlnCom_Richards @marymcnamara @MBridegam<br/> "from the standpoint of housing advocates, this isn't necessarily a flaw, but may reflect a view that local 'demolition controls' can be a means to discretionarily exclude needed and zoning-compliant housing. Consider SF's list of bases: [http://sf-planning.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/8462-RemovalDwellingUnits_ZoningControls_publication-030514.pdf http://sf-planning.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/8462-RemovalDwellingUnits_ZoningControls_publication-030514.pdf]."
Scott Wiener @Scott_Wiener [https://twitter.com/Scott_Wiener/status/962462328242413568 3:04 PM - 10 Feb 2018]<br/> Replying to @PlnCom_Richards @MBridegam<br/> "SB 827 does not override local demolition controls, but because of the misinformation that is swirling around, we are going to amend the bill to make extra explicit what is already the case: the bill will not alter or reduce local demolition controls."
YIMBYwiki @YIMBYwiki [https://twitter.com/YIMBYwiki/status/962522356206862336 7:03 PM - 10 Feb 2018]<br/> Replying to @Scott_Wiener @PlnCom_Richards @MBridegam<br/> "we'd suggest doing this cautiously, e.g. have #SB827 apply where HAA does - to objective standards; vs being preempted by any local demo control provision, which may be wide & discretionary. Consider SF's: demos blockable if projects judged to alter n'hood character. c/@cayimby."
Line 639 ⟶ 710:
*Deegan, Tim (2018). "[http://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/los-angeles-for-rss/14888-could-a-nightmare-worse-than-mansionization-be-lurking-in-sacramento Could a Nightmare Worse than Mansionization be Lurking in Sacramento?]" ''CityWatchLA, ''12 FEBRUARY 2018. [http://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/los-angeles-for-rss/14888-could-a-nightmare-worse-than-mansionization-be-lurking-in-sacramento http://www.citywatchla.com/index.php/los-angeles-for-rss/14888-could-a-nightmare-worse-than-mansionization-be-lurking-in-sacramento].<br/>
*Democratic Socialists of America, Austin chapter (DSA Austin 2018). "[https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1KD6JtmdeWubVfGOp-hCajUEbrMj5FqVqUhCwqBkdSJU/mobilebasic Austin DSA Housing Committee CodeNEXT Demands]." January 2018. [https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1KD6JtmdeWubVfGOp-hCajUEbrMj5FqVqUhCwqBkdSJU/mobilebasic. https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1KD6JtmdeWubVfGOp-hCajUEbrMj5FqVqUhCwqBkdSJU/mobilebasic. ]<br/>
*
Democratic Socialists of America, Los Angeles chapter (lead author; join statement with San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento chapters). "[http://www.dsa-la.org/statement_in_opposition_to_sb_827 Statement in Opposition to SB827 - Luxury Development for the Rich, Displacement and Dispossession for the Poor]." March 22, 2018. http://www.dsa-la.org/statement_in_opposition_to_sb_827.
*Dillon, Liam. "Get ready for a lot more housing near the Expo Line and other California transit stations if new legislation passes<br/> housing expo line." ''LA Times. [http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-transit-bill-20180104-story.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-transit-bill-20180104-story.html].''<br/>
*Dorfman, Jeffrey. “[https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/01/09/california-politicians-misunderstand-how-to-fix-its-housing-problem/#3dfe3dd71128 California Politicians Misunderstand How To Fix Its Housing Problem.]” Forbes, 9 Jan 2018. <br/> [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/01/09/california-politicians-misunderstand-how-to-fix-its-housing-problem/#3dfe3dd71128 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2018/01/09/california-politicians-misunderstand-how-to-fix-its-housing-problem/#3dfe3dd71128].<br/>
Line 649 ⟶ 723:
*Grabar, Henry. "[https://slate.com/business/2018/01/california-bill-sb827-residential-zoning-transit-awesome.html California Bill Would Allow Unrestricted Housing by Transit, Solve State Housing Crisis.]" 5 Jan 2018. [https://slate.com/business/2018/01/california-bill-sb827-residential-zoning-transit-awesome.html https://slate.com/business/2018/01/california-bill-sb827-residential-zoning-transit-awesome.html].<br/> ''"At first glance, the bill is too radical to pass; California homeowners would revolt, or at least use their remaining local power to shut down a whole lot of bus routes. At least one advocate for equitable development in South L.A. has compared the bill to Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act. Like most attempts to build more housing, it will likely be crushed between homeowners seeking to preserve property values and renters fearful of the resultant tear-downs and evictions.''<br/> '' "Wiener’s transit-oriented development bill, if it passed, would have the most radical impact of any California law since Prop 13, the 1978 resolution that permanently lowered the state’s property taxes (and dealt a blow to state finances that continues to this day). But even if it doesn’t, it puts some smaller good ideas on the table. If anyone were in a position to get some part of this passed, it would be California Gov. Jerry Brown, who is in the final year of his well-received second stint in charge of the country’s most populous state."''<br/>
*KPCC. "[https://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2018/01/05/61045/new-ca-bill-calling-for-denser-taller-housing-near/ New CA bill calling for denser, taller housing near transit could change the face of LA.]" 5 Jan 2018. [https://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2018/01/05/61045/new-ca-bill-calling-for-denser-taller-housing-near/ https://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2018/01/05/61045/new-ca-bill-calling-for-denser-taller-housing-near/].<br/> Guests:<br/> Ethan Elkind, director of the climate program at the Center for Law, Energy & the Environment, a joint venture of UCLA and UC Berkeley.<br/> Paul Koretz, City of Los Angeles councilmember representing the 5th District, which includes communities on the westside of L.A.<br/> Mark Ryavec, president of the Venice Stakeholders Association.<br/> <br/> Koretz: ''“You could end up with a Dubai around each transit stop.”''<br/> <br/> Ryavec: ''"This could cause the Miamization of Venice Beach." <br/> "The bill is using a sledgehammer to fix a piano."<br/> Suggests restoring cities' ability to do parcelization (parcel assembly), as done formerly under Redevelopment Agencies. <br/> Suggest the bill be scaled back to applying only to San Francisco. ''<br/>
*Los Angeles Times [Editorial Board]. "[http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-housing-near-transit-20180123-story.html Yes, California needs taller, denser development near transit. But not at the expense of affordable housing]." ''LA Times, ''JAN 23, 2018.<br/> [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-housing-near-transit-20180123-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-housing-near-transit-20180123-story.html].<br/>
*McKinsey Global Institute<sup>1</sup>. “A[https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/urbanization/closing-californias-housing-gap tool kit to close California’s housing gap: 3.5 million homes by 2025.]” October 2016. [https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/urbanization/closing-californias-housing-gap https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/urbanization/closing-californias-housing-gap].<br/> <sup>1</sup>Jonathan Woetzel, Los Angeles; Jan Mischke, Zurich; Shannon Peloquin, San Francisco; Daniel Weisfield, San Francisco. <br/>
*O'Malley, Becky. "[http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46357?headline=SB-827-Skinner-D-Berkeley-will-destroy-local-land-use-control--Becky-O-Malley SB 827 (Skinner, D-Berkeley) will destroy local land use control.]" ''Berkeley Daily Planet'', 6 January 2018. [http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46357 http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2018-01-06/article/46357]. [mostly quotes Goodman, 5 Jan 2018]. <br/>
Line 654 ⟶ 729:
*Reyes, Emily Alpert, and Zahniser, David. “[http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aids-foundation-political-spending-20170221-story.html So why is an AIDS nonprofit suing to halt construction and pushing for Measure S?]” ''LA Times'', 24 Feb 2017. [http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aids-foundation-political-spending-20170221-story.html. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aids-foundation-political-spending-20170221-story.html. ]<br/>
*Romero, Dennis. “[http://www.laweekly.com/news/battle-over-development-covets-the-hearts-and-minds-of-las-minorities-7992660 Battle Over Development Covets the Hearts and Minds of L.A.'s Minorities].” ''LA Weekly'', 6 Mar 2017. [http://www.laweekly.com/news/battle-over-development-covets-the-hearts-and-minds-of-las-minorities-7992660 http://www.laweekly.com/news/battle-over-development-covets-the-hearts-and-minds-of-las-minorities-7992660].<br/>
*San Francisco Chronicle [Editorial Board]. "[https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-California-s-housing-wars-just-12511603.php Editorial: California’s housing wars just starting.]" ''San Francisco Chronicle, ''January 19, 2018.<br/> [https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-California-s-housing-wars-just-12511603.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-California-s-housing-wars-just-12511603.php].<br/>
*Save Marinwood. "[http://www.savemarinwood.org/2018/01/senator-wiener-has-another-ridiculous.html Senator Wiener, has another ridiculous Housing Bill that could lead to the massive urbanization of Marin County.]" Save Marinwood blog, 5 Jan 2018. [http://www.savemarinwood.org/2018/01/senator-wiener-has-another-ridiculous.html http://www.savemarinwood.org/2018/01/senator-wiener-has-another-ridiculous.html].<br/>
*Wiener, Scott. "California Needs a Housing-First Agenda: My 2018 Housing Package." [https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/california-needs-a-housing-first-agenda-my-2018-housing-package-1b6fe95e41da https://medium.com/@Scott_Wiener/california-needs-a-housing-first-agenda-my-2018-housing-package-1b6fe95e41da]. <br/>
| |||