Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing State Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Francisco board reiterates opposition to SB 50 unless amended, sets list of requested changes
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted an amended resolution opposing California Senate Bill 50 unless the bill is changed to protect local area plans, fund anti-displacement measures, and require transportation investments. The vote was 10–1.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted an amended resolution on Dec. 17 opposing California Senate Bill 50 unless the bill is amended to respect local area plans, increase community benefits, fund anti‑displacement protections and ensure adequate transportation funding. The resolution passed 10–1, with Supervisor Safaie casting the lone no vote.
Supervisor Matt Haney, who joined as a cosponsor, and Supervisor Aaron Peskin framed the item as a request for targeted changes rather than blanket opposition. "There is no disagreement that San Francisco needs more housing, but the contentious debate over SB50 is about what housing we build and for whom," the sponsor, Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, told colleagues during the discussion.
Why it matters: The board said in the amended language it supports housing production but wants SB 50 to (1) ensure existing area and community plans are respected and provide community-based planning, (2) capture more of the value created by upzoning and direct it to affordable housing and community benefits, (3) provide funded and enforceable anti‑displacement protections, and (4) ensure transit and transportation resources accompany new housing.
Debate and positions: Supervisor Dean Preston said on his first day on the board he would support the amended resolution, calling the bill as drafted "bad for our city" because it would, in his view, "give away valuable development rights ... enriching developers, at the expense of our communities." Supervisor Norman Yee and others emphasized the need to combine up‑zoning with funding and planning to prevent displacement; Supervisor Safaie explained he would not support the board resolution because he believed the bill had evolved and contained provisions that could allow local flexibility.
Outcome and next steps: The clerk recorded a 10–1 vote in favor of the amended resolution. The board’s action is a policy position on SB 50; it does not change state law. Supervisors said the city will continue to press state lawmakers for the specific amendments listed in the resolution.
Authorities referenced: The resolution explicitly concerns California Senate Bill 50 (SB 50), the state bill authored by Senator Scott Wiener, and the Board references its own prior April 2019 resolution on SB 50.
Ending: Several supervisors said they intend to continue negotiating with state lawmakers and local stakeholders to try to secure the changes the board requested; no formal follow‑up deadline was set by the board in the meeting.
