Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board sends competing housing-streamline resolutions to committee after mayor27s letter prompts compromise talks
Summary
Supervisors Peskin and Wiener presented competing resolutions on the governor27s proposed "by-right" housing approvals. After mayoral suggestions and public comment, the board amended and voted to send both items to committee to craft a unified position.
The Board of Supervisors on June 14 considered two competing resolutions about the governor27s proposed "by-right" housing approvals (often described as "as-of-right" streamlining). Supervisor Aaron Peskin moved an amendment to his earlier opposition resolution and asked the Board to send both resolutions to committee. Supervisor Scott Wiener had offered an alternative that urged engagement with the governor to amend the trailer bill rather than blanket opposition.
Supervisor Peskin said the mayor27s office and the state legislative delegation had advanced amendments and that the city should speak with one voice in Sacramento. "We now have actual time to discuss this," Peskin said, noting the trailer bill timeline had shifted.
Supervisor Wiener argued the governor's proposal addresses a statewide housing-supply problem and should be improved rather than opposed outright. He said the legislation is imperfect but that mayors across California (Oakland, Los Angeles and San Francisco's mayor) were urging reform tied to production. Wiener said he preferred focusing on units produced rather than percentage-based carve-outs.
The board adopted Supervisor Peskin's amendments without objection and voted to send both item 48 (Peskin27s resolution as amended) and item 49 (Wiener27s amendment-oriented resolution) to committee to attempt to reconcile them.
Why it matters: The governor's proposal would limit local discretionary review in certain circumstances to speed housing approvals across the state. San Francisco faces a housing affordability crisis and many residents and advocacy groups urged the board either to work with the governor to preserve local protections or to seek exemptions.
Public comment: More than two dozen public speakers addressed the items. Positions were divided: housing advocates, planning and design groups and workforce advocates generally urged the Board to work with the governor or adopt streamlining accompanied by affordability; tenant and neighborhood advocates urged caution and protection of local review. Several speakers recommended using vacancy rates or RHNA performance rather than a percent-of-production metric for city-level exemptions.
Decision: The Board voted to send both resolutions to committee for further work and to attempt a single city position prior to state action.
