LBReport.com

News / In Depth / Follow-Up

Councilmembers Austin & Mungo Agendize May 7 Council Item To Oppose SB 50


If LBREPORT.com didn't tell you,
who would?
No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report.

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
(April 29, 2019, 7:55 p.m., updated April 30, 9:50 a.m.) -- Councilman Al Austin and Councilwoman Stacy Mungo have agendized an item for the May 7 Long Beach City Council to oppose SB 50.

In their agendizing memo, Councilmembers Austin and Mungo write:

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Request the City Council to oppose Senate Bill 50 (Wiener), which would preempt local zoning laws to allow higher density housing near "transit-rich" and "jobs-rich" areas, including in single-family neighborhoods, and take a "one-size-fits-all" to addressing land use for housing throughout the entire state.

BACKGROUND:

Long Beach has taken a proactive position to addressing the housing shortage that is not only affecting the City, but the entire state. In May 2017, the City Council approved a comprehensive plan entitled "Revenue Tools and Incentives for the Production of Affordable and Workforce Housing," and the City has implemented or is in the process of implementing many of those policies.

In March 2018, the City Council voted to confirm the General Plan Land Use Element Place Type and Height Maps, which will allow for additional housing development along many of the City's corridors. This was the result of over a decade of staff work and sometimes contentious public debate over where and how much housing should be allowed and the impacts on city services and neighborhoods. In the end, we reached a consensus on how best to meet our future housing needs while still preserving much of what makes Long Beach special.

Senate Bill 50 (Wiener) would require local governments to grant an equitable communities incentive to allow density bonuses in the construction of new housing. The incentives would include reducing parking requirements and increasing the allowable height to 45-55 feet.

Under SB 50 any neighborhood within one-half mile of a rail station or one-quarter mile from a bus route or near a "job rich area" would be required by state law to allow four or five-story apartment buildings, potentially built curb to curb, and with no on-site parking. The building square footage could be 2.5 or 3.25 times the lot size (FAR) - which far exceed the current limits for our single-family neighborhoods.

Moreover, while Long Beach continues to work to address our affordable housing needs, particularly near transit, SB 50 focuses mainly on the creation of market-rate housing and takes away planning oversight from local jurisdictions and shifts it to the state.

While the City is working to encourage additional housing in the City, Long Beach's plan takes into account the diversity of neighborhoods and their distinct characteristics throughout the City. If SB 50 becomes law, it would remove most of the local control that Long Beach has for the development of new housing in many parts of the City. Many other local governments, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, are opposing SB 50 because of its preemption of local land use regulations and procedures.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no significant fiscal impact with this recommendation.

[Scroll down for further.]






Up to four Councilmembers total can sign onto an agenda item; it's not clear whether one or two others will do so before noon Friday (May 3) when a supplemental agenda is published.

[UPDATED} A Council policy setting action (different from an ordinance) can be adopted with a majority of a quorum (minimum five) Councilmembers present. That means, if only five Councilmembers were present, it could carry on a 4-1 or even 3-2 vote. However, whatever the Council vote, it would be subject to a possible veto by Mayor Garcia, subject to a Council voted override. (If the Council acts by adopting a resolution, six Council votes are needed to override the veto; if the Council acts by simply adopting a "minute order," the Council can override the veto with only 2/3 of Councilmembers "present.") [end UPDATE]

As previously reported by LBREPORT.com, Councilwoman Mungo said at an April 18 meeting of the Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association that SB 50 is "going to try to overturn all of the work we did with LUE [Land Use Element]" and added "I stand opposed to that and I'm bringing it back to City Council..." (drawing applause.)

Sponsor

Sponsor

Density is an especially sore point in Long Beach, where 1980's City Hall pro-developer policies enabled "crackerbox" apartment density in single-family home neighborhoods surrounding downtown. The result saddled the City with a number of chronic issues (including parking.) LB's experience with "crackerbox" density was among the reasons for grassroots LB neighborhood opposition to increased density proposed by LB city staff in 2017-2018 Land Use Element changes.

Sponsor

Sponsor

On April 16, the Los Angeles City Council voted 12-0 to oppose SB 50 (unless amended to exclude Los Angeles). A few days earlier, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (SF's City Council) voted by a super-majority to reverse support for SB 50 voiced by SF's Mayor.

At the April 24 state Senate Governance and Finance Committee meeting, state Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg (D, Los Angeles-SFV) criticized SB 50, and while supporting Governor Gavin Newsom's housing plans, Sen. Hertzberg cited the L.A. City Council's voted opposition in casting his vote to oppose the bill. (Committee vote was 6-1-1 to advance SB 50 to the state Senate Appropriations Committee (for state budget impacts), one vote from a full state Senate vote.

Sponsor


A little over three weeks earlier, LB-area state Senator Tom Umberg (D, SE LB [908015/90803]) voted "yes" on SB 50 in the state Senate Housing Committee, and his "yes" vote helped send SB 50 to the April 24 Governance/Finance Committee which has now advanced it further with amendments summarized in this document (source: office of state Sen. Mike McGuire (D, No. Cal coast). To view SB 50's text prior to the agreed amendments, click here. A revised text for SB 50 won't be online for some time.

In a Sunday April 28 Facebook comment, Senator Wiener noted that a New York Times editorial has endorsed SB 50:

In advance of the April 24 Committee meeting, the Senate's Governance and Finance Committee's legislative analysis listed support and opposition as of April 19 as follows:

Support: 3,025 Individuals; 6beds, Inc.; AARP; Bay Area Council; Bridge Housing Corporation; Building Industry Association of The Bay Area; Burbank Housing Development Corporation; Calasian Chamber of Commerce; California Apartment Association; California Chamber of Commerce; California Community Builders; California National Party; California Yimby; Dana Point Chamber Of Commerce; Emeryville; City of; Facebook, Inc.; Fieldstead and Company, Inc.; Fossil Free California; Greater Washington; Hamilton Families; Local Government Commission; Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce; Ms.; Murrieta Chamber of Commerce; Natural Resources Defense Council; North Orange County Chamber of Commerce; Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce; Office of The Mayor, San Francisco; Orange County Business Council; Oxnard Chamber of Commerce; Related California; Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce; Santa Maria Valley Chamber of Commerce; Schott & Lites Advocates Llc; Silicon Valley At Home (Sv@Home); Silicon Valley Leadership Group; South Bay Jewish Federation; South Bay Yimby; Spur; State Council on Developmental Disabilities; Stripe; Technet-Technology Network; The Silicon Valley Organization; Tmg Partners; Valley Industry And Commerce Association; Yimby Action
Opposition: 1,850 Individuals; Aids Healthcare Foundation; Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (Acce) Action; American Planning Association, California Chapter; Asian Pacific Environmental Network; Barbary Coast Neighborhood Association; Bay Area Transportation Working Group; Berkeley Tenants Union; Brentwood Community Council - West Los Angeles; Causa Justa :: Just Cause; Central Valley Empowerment Alliance; Century Glen Hoa; City of Brentwood; City of Chino Hills; City of Cupertino; City of Downey; City of Glendale; City of Lafayette; City of Lakewood; City of La Mirada; City of Palo Alto; City of Rancho Cucamonga; City of Rancho Palos Verdes; City of Pinole; City of Redondo Beach; City of San Mateo; City of Santa Clarita; City of Solana Beach ;City of Sunnyvale; City of Vista; Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods; Preserve LA; Concerned Citizens of Los Feliz; Cow Hollow Association; Dolores Heights Improvement Club; Dolores Street Community Services; East Mission Improvement Association; East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice; City of Glendora; Grayburn Avenue Block Club; Homeowners of Encino; Housing for All Burlingame; Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco; Jobs with Justice San Francisco; Jordan Park Improvement Association; Legal Services for Prisoners with Children; League of California Cities; Los Angeles Tenants Union - Hollywood Local Case Worker; Los Angeles Tenants Union -- Networking Team; Miraloma Park Improvement Club; Mission Economic Development Agency; New Livable California Dba Livable California; Noe Neighborhood Council; Northeast Business Economic Development Dba Northeast Business Association; City of Pasadena; Planning Association for the Richmond; Poder; Redstone Labor Temple Association; Regional-Video; Sacred Heart Community Service; San Francisco Senior And Disability Action; San Francisco Rising Alliance; San Francisco Tenants Union; Save Capp Street; Senior and Disability Action; SF Ocean Edge; Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association; South Bay Cities Council Of Governments; South Brentwood Residents Association; South of Market Community Action Network; Stand Up For San Francisco; Sunset-Parkside Education And Action Committee (Speak); Sutro Avenue Block Club/Leimert Park; Telegraph Hill Dwellers; Tenant Sanctuary; Tenants Together; The San Francisco Marina Community Association; Toluca Lake Homeowners Association; United to Save the Mission; Urban Habitat; West Mar Vista Residents Association; Yah! (Yes to Affordable Housing)

The City of Long Beach has taken no publicly stated position to date on SB 50, which was introduced on December 3, 2018, although the Council voted in November 2018 (without dissent) to approve a 2019 "state legislative agenda (recommended by the Council's state legislation committee, comprised of Austin, Gonzalez and Richardson) that included the following policies: "Oppose legislation that would reduce the City's local land use authority" and "Oppose legislation that preempts the City's existing control over local matters."

On December 14, 2018, Councilwoman Gonzalez announced her candidacy for a vacated LB-S.E. L.A. County state Senate seat. She was swiftly endorsed by LB Mayor Garcia and (among others) state Senator Wiener, and announced that Councilman Richardson would serve as her "campaign chair."

Councilwoman Mungo was a member of the state legislation committee until the latter half of 2018, when Mayor Garcia replaced her with Councilman Richardson. Mungo endorsed Gonzalez for state Senate run in the initial multi-candidate March election (now in its two-candidate runoff phase); to our knowledge, Councilman Austin (who sought the state Senate seat but ended campaigning in late January) has made no endorsement in the race.

The Council's state legislation committee may recommend Council policy positions but its recommendations and approval aren't required for Council voted policy action. On multiple occasions, the Council has voted to support or oppose Sacramento bills without state legislation committee discussion or recommendations.

SB 50 would basically preempt certain aspects of locally-enacted single family zoning, It would prevent cities from limiting density within a half mile of fixed rail, or a quarter mile of high frequency bus stops (amended April 24 to specify every ten minutes) or -- regardless of transit -- in areas deemed "jobs-rich" (at or above regional median income and near quality schools.) It would require cities to allow apartments, duplexes/triplexes/fourplexes with 0.5 parking spaces per unit in residentially zoned areas (including the Coastal Zone for infill.) In addition, within half a mile of fixed rail stops, SB 50 would override local height limits lower than either 55 feet or 45 feet. (Areas adjacent to high frequency bus stops and areas designated "job-rich" areas would become subject to density increases and reduced parking requirements but not the specified building height increases; in those non-rail transit adjacent areas, local height limits will apply.)

Developing.

April 30, 9:55 a.m. Text re Council quorum majority vote detailed, clarified.


Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:


Follow LBReport.com with:

Twitter

Facebook

RSS

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com



Adoptable pet of the week:





Carter Wood Floors
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050


Copyright © 2018 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here