Extra

We can all agree there is a need for more housing, but SB 9 and 10, currently on track for final State approval, brings major problems instead of real solutions to our housing problems. BSB ( and 10 will build a future filled with market rate speculation achieved through a State-driven “one-size fits all” future policy direction applied to every city in California from tiny Angels Camp to gigantic Los Angeles. Neither addresses our real need, affordable housing.

SB 9 supporters say single-family zoning must be eliminated because opponents are “racists” who want to continue past “red lining” practices. We can’t change the awful things that have occurred in the past, but what we can do is to ensure that today discrimination issues are correctly being addressed and vigorously support such efforts in regard to both homeowners and renters. We also well understand that up-coming State mandated measures regarding Accessory Dwelling Units that allow one ADU and a Jr-ADU on each single-family parcel, will already eliminate single-family zoning as we know it. However, SB 9 goes much further by allowing lot splits in single-family zones even after full ADU development, so that together, each lot split could have 4 to 6 units where only one formerly existed. Worse yet, SB 9 provides that approvals for such development can be done “ministerially” by a city worker, without any notice to neighbors or public hearing.

SB 10 allows 10 - 14 units on each parcel with a single-family home, again through a “ministerial” process. It also allows bypassing California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and local voter initiatives, such as our 1986 Measure L which calls for a vote of the people when public open space is to be developed for other than recreational purposes. 

Berkeley is only 8 - 9 square miles big and it’s already developed as one of the most dense cities in the Bay Area, Our eastern border is a Wildfire Urban Interface Zone and land along our western border has been found to be sinking and will be impacted by Sea Level Rise projections. We are bisected by the Alquist-Priolo (Hayward Fault) Earthquake Zone (said to be the most dangerous fault line in the U.S) with hillsides studded by USGS designated landslide areas. We have old, failing infrastructure – water, sewer, and power lines - that must be upgraded to support new development which under SB 9 and 10 will be at the expense of the taxpayers, not the developers. And we have 44 miles of streets, mostly in the hills, that are so narrow (26 feet wide or less) that cannot accommodate emergency vehicles and resident evacuation.  

SB 9 says there are exemptions to increased development if the parcel is located in a high-fire severity zone “unless the site has adopted fire hazard mitigation measures required by existing building standards,” but there are questions as what this means. Some analysts say it doesn’t mean anything because every building built anywhere has to meet building standards, and it says nothing about how residents can flee an approaching wildfire. CalFire maps show only Fire Zone 3 is a “high-fire risk” zone, yet narrow streets exist in Fire Zone 2 too. A recent UC Berkeley study, Urban Density Effect on Wildfire Evacuation, using 1991 firestorm conditions applied to the Berkeley Hills, indicated that residents have only two hours to evacuate. Our former Fire Chief said that under certain conditions Berkeley could burn down from ridge to shore in just one hour. Just days ago, we were officially advised that all hillside residents leave the city when there are weather conditions such as high winds, high temperatures and low humidity. That’s just the kind of weather we can anticipate in the next few months! What more proof is needed that increasing the number of people in these known dangerous areas defies common sense? Lives are at risk. 

Cities all over California and the League of California Cities are protesting SB 9 and 10. Thirty-six communities in Southern California, with majorities of Black and Latino residents, are proclaiming their opposition because they have worked hard and long to become neighbors, homeowners and renters together, in a single-family neighborhood. A newly released poll by Obama campaign pollster David Binder shows 71% opposed to SB 9 and 75% opposed to SB 10. A poll by Berkeley Neighborhoods Council of Berkeley residents gives similar results for SB 9 with 76.5% opposed citywide, and every single Council District indicating more than a 2.3s majority opposed. 

For those who dismiss such concerns in the belief that building more housing will result in affordability, please think again. The cost of building is tied to land and construction costs. The new units proposed under these bills will not pencil out so that less than market rate can occur. If you think that the number of new units (the old supply and demand theory) will drive down the price, take a look at New York City, the most dense of US cities where rents and ownership have never ever gone down.  

Our own City Council refused to oppose SB 9 as written We are now down to the wire and this is the time for us to join the statewide effort to defeat SB 9 and 10 The State Legislature is in recess until August 16. Please immediately write your representatives, State Senate and Assembly and the Governor and let them know of your opposition. Then, let’s all get together and work on getting some affordable housing in our cities. It’s all up to us now and we can do it, if we stand united and work to defeat SB 9 and 20!