Editor,
Regarding Coralin Feierbach’s guest perspective “The Senate Bill 50 disaster” in the Jan. 15 edition of the Daily Journal, it’s irresponsible for the author to claim that the housing bill is a “takeover of our cities’ zoning power for the state.”
The truth is that for years, cities like San Mateo and Belmont have been utterly delinquent in their responsibilities to build housing units as outlined in state law and SB 50 provides a means for remedying this issue. The housing shortage is an especially frustrating reality for my college-aged contemporaries, many of whom want more than anything to stay in the Bay Area and raise families here but struggle daily to pursue that goal given the extreme shortage of housing units. SB 50 is a sound first step that will hold our city governments accountable for housing laws outlined in state law and make our communities denser, cheaper and more equitable.
SB 50’s proposal to prioritize housing around transit is an excellent answer to our utterly unsustainable situation; more people living around reliable transit options means fewer local residents electing to drive cars to and from work each day. In addition, building more housing around transit means that fewer people spend two or more hours a day in their car commuting from outside the area. Most important of all, building housing around transit and holding our local governments accountable to state law means that young people in California will have a greater opportunity to raise their families in the communities that they love.
Jay Ford
San Mateo
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(6) comments
If AB50 is so great, put it up for a vote of the citizens of California.
CC is amazing. our own Nostradamus.
This whole issue could be resolved by making new office and research facility permits contingent upon building housing for the new employees. Notice that new apartment and condominium complexes require sufficient parking for those new dwellers. Why not demand that housing be part of new office construction? That would certainly put a crimp in the ever increasing construction of those facilities. And, why does Belmont bear responsibility to provide housing for new office and laboratory workers in Foster City, San Mateo and San Carlos? Our former Mayor is 100% correct.
To your final point, suggest you read up on "jobs-rich areas" in the bill. That is why that is in there.
Parochialism will continue unless we move away from political borders (they are artificial), and why it will require a state level solution to our local issues
Ignorance, inability to connect the dots, and an unwillingness to address our youngs future needs (which are now current needs)
Why is it another cities (across an artificial border) responsibility to build more affordable bedrooms ? It should be EVERY cities responsibility
That mentality pervades most all city general plans...
I guess I just wasn't around when I first bought a home and it was everyone elses responsibility. When exactly did that become every cities responsibility?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.