Extra

In response to the growing opposition to proposed State Assembly Bill SB9, the Berkeley Neighborhoods Council (BNC) conducted a poll of over 13,000 Berkeley residents. The results indicated an overall 76.5% of respondents were opposed to the proposed measure SB9, which would allow property owners in single-family residential zones to split their lots and construct multiple units on each half. The bill was heavily opposed in every City Council district of Berkeley by a clear majority of no less than two-thirds of respondents in each district. 

The BNC poll results stand in stark contrast to the recent June 15, 2021 action by the Berkeley City Council denying support for a letter of opposition to the bill which was to be sent to the State’s lawmakers. That letter of opposition drafted by Councilmember Susan Wengraf (District 6) and co-sponsored by Councilmembers Kate Harrison (District 4) and Sophie Hahn (District 5) failed to win approval by a vote of [3- 3 -3 (Aye-No-Abstain)]. 

Most notable in the BNC poll, which attracted 793 respondents , was the overwhelming number of individual comments. Over 95% of respondents submitted comments with the largest number citing strong opposition to the bill’s lack of an affordability requirement and opposing the bill’s proposed “ministerial” approval clause which would allow the State mandate to override local zoning controls some of which protect local residents against hazards like fires, floods, and earthquakes. Similar state-mandated “by-right” actions are currently in effect for housing bills; While bills such as SB9 and SB10 have been portrayed by proponents as helping to provide much needed affordable housing, in actuality, without specific affordability requirements, developers would not be required to provide onsite housing at affordable levels. 

According to BNC Co-Founder, Dean Metzger, “In most cases, what is happening is that developers most always choose to build market-rate (high-end luxury) housing, while in the case of large projects only providing the bare minimum number of affordable units. In the case of SB9 without an affordability requirement, developers will choose to build market rate housing.” 

Bills like SB9 attempt to target single-family residential zones as one of the barriers to diversity and affordable housing with proponents continually citing the discriminatory origins of such districts while pointing to the promise of affordability to people of all income levels and ethnicities by eliminating such zones. “While the history of redlining is a reality, bills like SB9 that attempt to address a lack of affordable housing without implementing measures to mandate affordability are surely doomed to fail in their efforts to achieve economic and racial diversity”, counters James Peterson of BNC. 

NC.