LBReport.com

News

Assembly Approves SB 9 Requiring Cities To Allow 4 Dwelling Units on Single Family Lots (Exempts Historic Districts), Prohibits Add'l Parking Within Half Mile Of Transit

Action Moves Bill Within One Vote Of Reaching Governor Newsom; Mayor/Council Let Bill Advance Since Dec. 2020 With No Public Discussion Or Opposition



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.
(Aug. 27, 2021, 3:50 a.m.) -- As flashed on LBREPORT.com's front page and Facebook platform on Aug. 26, the Assembly has voted 44-16 to approve SB 9, full text as most recently amended here, which would require cities of LB's size to approve splitting single family home lots to allow four dwelling units (potenially up to eight with separate City Hall approval.) It also prohibits requiring parking to match the increased density within a half mile of "a high-quality transit corridor" or a "major transit stop" as defined in state law. The bill exempts state specified historic districts.


After the floor vote tally showed SB 9 had passed (required 41 votes), the final recorded vote changed to 45-19 (Assemblyman Gray (D, Merced) added on as a "yes" vote; and Assemblymembers Bauer-Kahan (D, Santa Clara), Petrie-Norris (D, OC coastal incl HB, NB), Irwin (D, Camarillo) added on as "no" votes. 15 Assemblmembers had "no votes recorded.")

SB 9 passed the state Senate months ago with "yes" votes by co-author state Senator (former CD1 Councilmember) Lena Gonzalez (D, LB-SE LA County) and state Senator Tom Umberg (D, SE LB/west OC.)

Since Dec. 2020, LB Mayor Garcia and every LB City Council incumbent refused pleas by LB neighborhood groups to agendize SB 9 for public discussion and voted action on a City of LB position.

Five Council incumbents are seeking re-election in 2022 in CDs 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9. In CD 5, former Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske 2006-2014) is seeking to replace incumbent Stacy Mungo. In CD 7, Reform Coalition co-founder Carlos Ovalle is seeking to replace incumbent Roberto Uranga. State Senator Umberg is also seeking re-election in 2022.

Dozens of CA cities (listed below) -- including he City of Los Angeles by 12-1 voted action of its City Council -- opposed SB 9. Long Beach opponents included The Eastside Voice, Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association Citizens About Responsible Planning and People of Long Beach [the latter led by Carlos Ovalle]

SB 9 Supporters included the CA Apartment Ass'n and the League of Women Voters (CA).

Assemblyman Patrick O'Donnell (D, LB-San Pedro) voted "no" on SB 9 but didn't argue against the bill on the Assembly floor. Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D, NLB-Paramount) and Assemblyman Mike Gipson (D, NLB/Carson) both voted "yes" on SB 9.

SB 9 now returns to the state Senate for agreement in Assembly amendments and then goes to Gov. Newsom who could sign it into law or veto it.

[Scroll down for further.]










On Aug. 16, SB 9's authors made two limited tweaks (amendments)

  • A [City Hall] 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 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.

  • An applicant [would have to] sign an affidavit stating that they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split [unless the applicant is a community land trust or a qualified nonprofit corporation.]
  • Sponsor

    As of June 22 (prior to the amendments), SB 9 had the following registered supporters/opponents in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.

    Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee
    REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
    
    Support
    
    Bridge Housing Corporation
    Cal Asian Chamber of Commerce
    California Apartment Association
    California Community Economic Development Association (CCEDA)
    California YIMBY
    City Council Member, City of Gilroy
    City of Alameda
    Clear Advocacy
    County of Monterey
    Eden Housing
    Facebook
    Facebook, INC.
    Fathers and Families of San Joaquin
    Inland Empire Regional Chamber of Commerce
    Inner City Struggle
    League of Women Voters of California
    LISC San Diego
    Local Government Commission
    Long Beach Yimby
    Mountain View Yimby
    Orange County Business Council
    Palo Alto Forward
    San Fernando Valley YIMBY
    Santa Barbara Women's Political Committee
    Santa Cruz YIMBY
    South Bay YIMBY
    The Central Valley Urban Institute
    YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County
    
    Support If Amended
    California Association of Realtors
    California Community Land Trust Network
    California State Association of Counties
    Rural County Representatives of California
    Urban Counties of California I
    California Community Land Trust Network
    
    Opposition
    
    AIDS Healthcare Foundation
    Alameda Citizens Task Force
    Albany Neighbors United
    California Cities for Local Control
    Catalysts
    Century Glen HOA
    Cities Association of Santa Clara County
    Citizens About Responsible Planning Long Beach CA
    City and County Association of Governments of San Mateo County
    City of Arcata
    City of Atascadero
    City of Bellflower
    City of Beverly Hills
    City of Burbank
    City of Camarillo
    City of Carson
    City of Cerritos
    City of Chino
    City of Chino Hills
    City of Crescent City
    City of Cypress
    City of Downey
    City of El Segundo
    City of Glendora
    City of Hidden Hills
    City of Huntington Beach
    City of Irwindale
    City of LA Canada Flintridge
    City of Lafayette
    City of Laguna Niguel
    City of Lake Forest
    City of Lomita
    City of Menifee
    City of Mission Viejo
    City of Modesto
    City of Norwalk
    City of Oakley
    City of Ontario
    City of Palm Desert
    City of Palos Verdes Estates
    City of Pasadena
    City of Pismo Beach
    City of Placentia
    City of Pleasanton
    City of Rancho Palos Verdes
    City of Redondo Beach
    City of Rolling Hills
    City of Rolling Hills Estates
    City of Signal Hill
    City of South Gate
    City of Sunnyvale
    City of Thousand Oaks
    City of Torrance
    City of Yorba Linda
    Coalition for Economic Survival
    Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods
    Comstock Hills Homeowners Association
    Eastside Voice Long Beach CA
    Grayburn Avenue Block Club
    Indivisible 43
    Indivisible Ca
    Indivisible California Green Team
    Indivisible Marin
    Indivisible Normal Heights
    Indivisible Ross Valley
    Indivisible San Jose
    Las Virgenes-Malibu Council of Governments
    Latino Alliance for Community Engagement
    League of California Cities
    Los Angeles Urban League
    Magnolia Ave Residents Association
    Mangan Park Neighborhood Association
    Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers
    Miracle Mile Residential Association
    Mission Street Neighbors
    Montecito Association
    Neighbors for a Better San Diego
    New Livable California Dba Livable California
    Old Agoura Homeowners
    Progressive Democrats of America
    Progressive Democrats of Santa Monica Mountains
    Riviera Homeowners Association
    Rooted in Resistance
    S.B. Residents for Responsible Development
    Save Lafayette
    Seaside Neighborhood Association
    Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association
    SoCal 350
    South Shores Community Association
    Sunnyvale United Neighbors
    Sustainable TamAlmonte
    Temecula Valley Neighborhood Coalition
    The City of Lakewood
    The Valley Village Homeowners Association
    Town of Woodside
    Tri-valley Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, San Ramon, and Town of Danville
    Truckee; Town of
    United Neighbors
    Ventura Council of Governments
    Verdugo Woodlands West Homeowners Association
    West Pasadena Residents' Association
    Westwood Hills Property Owners Association
    Westwood South of Santa Monica Blvd. Homeowners Association
    
    Oppose Unless Amended
    
    Build Affordable Faster CA
    Carlsbad; City of
    City of Bradbury
    City of Brea
    City of Del Mar
    City of Half Moon Bay
    City of Indian Wells;
    City of Laguna Beach
    City of Lakewood
    City of Los Altos
    City of Rancho Cucamonga
    City of San Marcos
    City of Santa Paula
    City of Simi Valley
    City of Stanton
    City of Whittier
    San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
    Town of Apple Valley

    Sponsor


    After SB 9 had already cleared the state Senate and passed all Assembly policy committees, CD 3's Suzie Price, writing as an individul Councilmember, sent a June 23 letter that stopped short of opposing SB 9 but voiced concerns and suggested that Sacramento lawmakers make unspecified amendments giving LB City Hall greater autonomy on development projects.

    Sponsor

    Sponsor

    Price's letter contended that the City of Long Beach has made "significant, good faith progress to improve housing policies with the goal with the goal of creating an environment conducive to more housing development but does so in a way that considers the unique local circumstances and environment of our city." It requests "that you [state lawmakers] consider appropriate changes to SB 9 with the intention of eliminating unintended consequences that harm communities where good faith and meaningful progress is being made on housing. Perhaps one incentive for cities that are making progress would be would be to allow more autonomy and discretion for future development projects...I defer to you on how that balance could be reached but I hope you will consider something along those lines as the discussion moves forward."


    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:




    Copyright © 2021 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here