Leg Ver1

[ Opposing California State Senate Bill No. 50 (Wiener) - Housing Development: Incentives - Unless Amended ] Resolution opposing California Sta te Senate Bill No. 50, authored by Senator Scott Wiener, which would undermine community participation in planning for the well-being of the environment and the public good , prevent the public from recapturing an equitable portion of the economic benefits conferred to private interests, and significantly restrict San Francisco’s ability to protect vulnerable communities from displacement and gentrification , unless further amended . WHEREAS, T he California State L egislature is currently considering passa ge of State Senate Bill No. 50 (SB 50) , which would entitle real estate developers to increase both residential and mixed use development with significantly less public review and in excess of many existing local plans developed often after extensive public participation and in concert with our regional governing agencies and consistent with state planning mandates; and WHEREAS , SB 50 would incentivize market rate housing development unaffordable to most San Franciscans without guaranteeing increased affordable housing development, while 94 percent of the City’s market-rate-housing goals through the year 202 2 have already been met and less than 30 percent of moderate and low inco me housing goals have been met , according to the Planning Department's development pipeline report ; and WHEREAS, T he City and County of San Francisco along with many other communities is striving to address the social and environmental impacts of regional growth of private industry , which include displacement of low income seniors, working families, and communities of color , and strained public transit and infrastructure; and the City has been most successful managing this growth through the adoption of community-driven local plans; and WHEREAS, SB 50 establishes an optional and only temporary exception from its mandated development incentives for formulaically defined ‘Sensitive Communities’ with the apparent purpose of controlling displacement while expanding growth; and WHEREAS, SB 50 restricts the ability of the city to adopt long term zoning and land use policies to assure equitable and affordable developme nt in all its neighborhoods ; denies the city the ability to adjust or expand the boundaries of those protected neighborhoods based upon community testimony and additional research ; and SB 50’s temporary ‘Sensitive Communities’ exemption fails to encompass many of the areas threatened by development driven displacement and gentrification, including parts of the Mission, Chinatown, Western South of Market, Portola, the Bayview, Castro, Inner Richmond and others; and WHEREAS , N eighborhoods outside “Sensitive Communities” targeted by SB50 in hot market cities like San Francisco can also experience hidden gentrification and displacement pressures, including on cash poor homeowners, and experience significant barriers for affordable housing production, such that raising land values through upzoning without the certainty of affordable units getting built in these neighborhoods will exacerbate pressures and barriers to develop non-speculative, permanently affordable housing, especially where there is no local community plan to facilitate and guide increased development ; and WHEREAS, The upzoning proposed by SB 50 confers significant value to properties for increased development opportunity and yet is not tied to any increased affordability requirements for San Francisco above and beyond the baseline Inclusionary standard already required of development projects, which undermines sound public policy that requires any substantial value created by density increases or other upzoning be used, at least in part, to provide a meaningful net increase in affordable housing; and WHEREAS, W hile SB 50’s provisions standing alone may appear to preserve local demolition controls and other local planning processes, without further clarifying amendments , the combination of SB 50’s development incentives with other state laws undermine the ability of local governments to protect existing housing and small businesses and otherwise advance the public good , specifically through community-driven local plans ; now, therefore, be it RESOLved, T hat the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco joins with other local jurisdictions and a growing statewide coalition of housing advocates in opposing SB 50 unless amended to cure these concerns; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, T hat the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco is committed to working with its State Legislative Delegation to craft the necessary amendments to SB 50 in order to adequately guarantee housing affordability, protect vul nerable communities , and protect San Francisco’s sovereign charter authority; and, be it FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco directs the Clerk of the Board to transmit copies of this resolution to the State Legislature and the City Lobbyist upon passage.