Same fate but hope for SB 50

Not to be dissuaded though, Wiener said he plans to again introduce a similar, amended proposal later in this year’s legislative session — keeping the hope alive for the divisive initiative aiming to address the state’s shortfall of about 3.5 million homes.

“I’m committed to this work. We don’t have the luxury of saying ‘well, we tried,’” said Wiener, who introduced two housing placeholder bills following the narrow defeat of SB 50. One bill addresses affordable housing built by churches and charitable organizations, and the other will be a retooled, successor version of the More HOMES Act.

For the second time in consecutive years, the proposal failed to advance through the Senate which Hill framed as an opportunity for lawmakers to craft a more sensible approach to addressing housing issues.

“The severity of the housing problem obligates us to do our work in the Senate to send the Assembly a better-finished legislative solution,” Hill said in a prepared statement.

Calling it too vague, Hill said the proposal largely ignored the concerns shared by residents and local officials who raised issues with the associated impacts invited by increased housing development.

“We need clearer parameters on the housing creation required for local governments and our communities, and on the flexibility allowed to local governments to locate housing where it works best for our communities,” he said.

More specifically, he also cited potential parking shortfalls generated by the bill as an insurmountable hurdle.

“We also need a realistic view of the parking needs created by new housing. To require none ignores reality and worsens existing parking shortfalls in the very transit corridors where the legislation seeks to foster new housing,” he said.

The measure would have allowed developers to build five-story apartment buildings within a half-mile of rail stations and ferry terminals. Smaller apartment buildings could have been built within a quarter-mile of bus stops on a frequent bus line or a census tract that officials say has lots of available jobs.

Developers would be allowed to build those apartments in areas where local zoning laws don’t allow them, including neighborhoods filled with single-family homes. That’s why many local governments opposed the bill. The bill needed 21 votes to pass, but only got 18. Fifteen senators voted against it, including Hill and seven lawmakers from Los Angeles.

For his part, Hill said he would like to see legislation proposed which is more considerate of the concerns shared by local officials and residents.

“We should not obligate our local governments and communities to fulfill commitments and undertake solutions that are unclear — that only sets all of us up for failure and promises to make the current crisis worse,” he said.

Claiming he had the requisite support going into the vote, Wiener blamed the final outcome on “unfortunate politics.” And while he would not elaborate on details, he said he is optimistic the successor to SB 50 will enjoy a happier ending.

“This is about the future of California, and there is nothing uncommon for a very hard bill to take multiple attempts before it gets passed. There is nothing out of the ordinary here,” he said.

Wiener said he has been heartened by the messages he’s received from former and current lawmakers both expressing support for his commitment to getting the bill though, and sharing their stories of similar failures in advance of eventual success.

Considering the legislation a key piece of a larger effort to make California more affordable, Wiener said he believes the struggle to get the bill approved reflects the scope of the state’s housing crisis.

“There are no easy solutions,” he said. “There are only hard, long-term solutions.”

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105