Kudos to the South San Francisco City Council for rejecting and saying no to Senate Bill 9 (“South City opts to oppose bill” in the July 29 edition of the Daily Journal. This City Council did exactly what its citizens elected them to do; look out for the best interests of its citizens. Senate Bill 9 is bad public policy. A recent letter writer criticizes the South San Francisco City Council for wanting to maintain its local control of its community. Nonsense! One primary role of a local city government is to do just that; create and maintain the look and feel of a community the citizens want; it’s called representative government. 

Congratulations to the citizens of South San Francisco for having a City Council that has the political courage to put its citizens first. 

David Altscher


Recommended for you

(3) comments



"Excerpt from this great article..........

"It's a lot-splitting bill which will increase density and undermine local control and decision-making. Will cause loss of yards, loss of trees, allow voter initiatives to be overturned by city councils, reduce setbacks [Allows Maximum 4 Foot Side & Rear Yards], minimizes off-street parking, requires no infrastructure improvements, and includes NO affordable housing requirement. Becker doesn’t seem to be worried that City Councils will override voters, as allowed by the bill, because he feels it takes years to get things through the system and that voters would have enough time to change the City Council if things seem to be going the wrong way, quote: “if developers could take over city councils, they would have…”. Clearly he hasn’t paid attention to what’s going on in Pacifica, or has already happened with Condominium Cancer in San Carlos (where resident polls show overwhelming sentiment that ‘it’s too crowded’). A wise local politician pointed out to me that “it only takes $25 to 50K to buy a small city council with campaign contributions, and if you have a property worth $1 million more with a zoning variance, it’s well worth the bet.”

Communities all over CA are outraged by this proposed Bill. Call Senator Becker and Assemblyman Mullin and tell them "NO."

Dirk van Ulden

Well David, I totally agree with you and the SSF Council. However, the editor of our northern SF newspaper sees racism everywhere and has the gumption that such zoning has its origin in racism. It all started when neighbors in Berkeley objected to having Chinese laundries next door, implying that French laundries would have been OK. He is likely a new to California kid on the block and throws out red herrings.

Newell Post

Many local city councils have opposed SB9, and many of those councils are pro-housing. But they realize that different cities have different kinds of housing needs and different physical configurations. Those problems are best addressed by local planning and zoning, not by Sacramento (unfunded) mandates like SB9.

Welcome to the discussion.

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 Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase an Enhanced 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!