Latest news with #SB677
San Francisco Chronicle
4 days ago
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
Who are the most powerful NIMBYs in California? Realtors
First-time homebuyers in California face a treacherous path: Inventory is scarce, and the few homes on the market in the state's major cities are likely to run well over $1 million. You've no doubt heard many of the explanations for why it's so difficult to buy a home, including antiquated zoning restrictions and overzealous environmental regulations that have blocked new construction. Yet the headlines often overlook another crucial impediment for prospective homebuyers: California real estate agents. Without the help of creative real estate professionals, my wife and I might never have broken into the California housing market. From 2018 to the end of 2021, single-family home prices in our home city of Los Angeles increased by almost $300,000, or 47.7%. By 2021, a mere 15.5% of people ages 25 to 35 owned their own homes. If that were the only option available to us, we might have been forced to relocate like the 9.2 million California residents who moved to other U.S. states during the 2010s. Thankfully, our real estate agent helped us explore an alternative arrangement, which led to us buying a duplex with a friend. Duplexes, along with townhomes and cottage courtyards, are all forms of ' missing middle housing ' that have historically served as a common starter home for families. Our story should be more common — after all, no one should be more invested in expanding creative home sales opportunities than real estate agents, whose job is to help families realize their homeownership dreams. Instead, the leadership of the California Association of Realtors has used its considerable political lobbying power to consistently oppose reforms that would make homeownership more accessible to families. Zoning is one example. One of the most impactful reforms to unlock homeownership is to make zoning more flexible, increasing the potential supply of homes in existing neighborhoods. My wife and I were only able to own a home because we bought in a neighborhood that had legalized duplexes decades ago. When Auckland, New Zealand, adopted flexible zoning in 2016 to allow starter homes options, such as townhomes and triplexes, buyers of these new homes were most commonly first-time homeowners. Even better, the city has had a much-needed decade of home price stability since those reforms, even while prices rose in the rest of the country. In California, only 7% of new homes in California are built under 1,400 square feet. Increasing the construction of smaller homes would do wonders for first-time homeowners. Yet two bills that would have done this by making it easier to create 2 to 8 unit buildings on all residential land in California — SB677 and AB647 — both failed this spring, in part due to loud opposition from the realtor lobby. Last year, the California Association of Realtors also lined up against legislation to reform construction liability laws to make it more financially feasible to build condominiums. Liability fears have slashed condo construction in California to a fraction of its peak in the mid-2000s, with about 90% of multifamily construction now being built as rental housing. This trend is not driven by interest rates: other places are building multifamily housing. The percentage of new units built as condos is four times higher in Hawaii than in California. Yet, in 2024, when lawmakers considered reforming liability law, the realtors' association played an instrumental part in opposing the bill, which ultimately led to its demise in committee. This opposition harms clients and undermines the association's members. As of March, there were 428,895 licensed real estate professionals in California, and only about 58,000 homes listed on the market — roughly eight professionals per listing. The math does not favor the average real estate professional's success — not due to a lack of effort, but rather because outdated zoning codes restrict supply. Housing reforms would be especially beneficial to younger real estate agents, who often achieve their first sales by helping friends buy a home. Effectively banning starter homes in California will permanently lock them out of the industry. Supporting flexible zoning would allow real estate agents to live up to their commitment to righting historical wrongs. In 2022, the California Association of Realtors officially apologized for its role in the long history of denying access to neighborhoods based on race. Yet racial inequality in the real estate market is ongoing, worsened because of bad policies to restrict supply. From 1980 to 2021, the homeownership rate among Black Californians ages 25 to 35 dropped from 10.8% to 1.4%. Opposing zoning reform, especially changes that would open up high-opportunity neighborhoods, is putting the association on the wrong side of its rhetorical commitments, cheapening any sense that it cares to atone for past wrongs. California's aspiring homeowners and young real estate professionals deserve better. The housing market and economic environment are too complex for such an important institution to take stances that make homeownership more difficult. If the leadership of the California Association of Realtors wants to uphold the group's stated ethics of 'protect and promote the interests of their client,' it should consider embracing housing reforms, not standing in their way. Otherwise, the agents and clients the association serves may start asking harder questions about whose interests are ultimately being prioritized.
San Francisco Chronicle
26-04-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Has California learned anything from the rise of Trump? The fate of this bill will tell us
Following resounding losses by Democrats in the November election, party leaders such as Gov. Gavin Newsom have sought to align themselves with the burgeoning 'abundance' movement, which contends that blue states will only win back voters if they can prove their ability to govern effectively — including by providing access to basic goods, such as high-quality public education and widely available housing. How's that effort going in California? In short — not well. If you pay attention to California politics, you likely heard about the death this week of SB677, a bill to make it easier to split single-family-home lots for duplexes or fourplexes, and the near killing of SB79, which would allow multifamily housing up to seven stories near major transit stops — both from state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. The bills' primary assailant was state Sen. Aisha Wahab, D-Fremont, chair of the Senate Housing Committee, who has leaned on the tired refrain that efforts to streamline new housing production are 'giveaways for developers,' partly because they reduce the ability of local governments to weigh in on projects. Wahab's insistence on fighting for California's failed status quo on housing, even as American democracy sinks around us, rightly drew outrage. But for an even bleaker example of how state leaders are failing to rise to the urgency of the moment, Californians should consider the response to AB1121 from Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park (Los Angeles County). The seemingly uncontroversial bill would require California teachers in transitional kindergarten through fifth grade to be trained in the 'science of reading,' which emphasizes the importance of foundational literacy skills, including phonics — or sounding out words. It would also require schools to adopt an evidence-based reading curriculum in transitional kindergarten through eighth grade. Backed by decades of interdisciplinary research, this approach has proven to be particularly effective in teaching young kids how to read — regardless of their mother language. California schools and teachers currently have a fair amount of leeway in the curriculum they use, and the state doesn't track those materials or how effective they are. But a review of more than 300 of the state's largest school districts conducted by the California Reading Coalition found that fewer than 2% use programs aligned with the science of reading. The results speak for themselves. Nearly 60% of our third graders didn't meet state standards for English language arts and literacy in the 2023-24 school year. Meanwhile, poverty-stricken red states such as Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have surged ahead of California in childhood literacy after adopting mandatory foundational literacy teaching and training. That California childhood literacy rates have fallen significantly beneath those of the poorest state in the nation should be considered a stain on the progressive values this state claims to stand for. Yet last year, California Democrats silently killed a bipartisan bill to mandate the science of reading, refusing to even discuss the topic publicly. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi, D-Rolling Hills Estates (Los Angeles County), who leads the Assembly Education Committee (and is running for state superintendent of public instruction next year) tabled the bill without a hearing amid fierce opposition from influential interest groups — including the California Teachers Association and Californians Together, which advocates for English language learners. Yes, you read that correctly — ensuring California kids receive the most effective reading lessons didn't even merit a discussion among Democrats in the face of union opposition. Rubio's bill faced similar hurdles this year. Most enraging is that the state's English language arts framework already underscores that foundational reading skills 'should be given high priority' among other strategies in early literacy instruction. State law also requires teacher candidates to demonstrate their fluency in evidence-based foundational reading methods to receive their credential. Meanwhile, literacy rates at some of California's lowest-performing schools improved significantly after adopting this curriculum. So what's behind the reluctance to implement this approach more widely? Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, told the editorial board that Rubio's bill was too narrowly focused on foundational skills and didn't take into account the needs of English language learners. But nothing in Rubio's bill precludes teachers from incorporating other reading strategies and approaches — it merely codifies the state's existing stance, which is that foundational skills should be prioritized. Meanwhile, Leslie Littman, vice president of the California Teachers Association, argued the bill would weaken local control over education. 'Teacher input, teacher voice, in the decision-making process with the curriculum and the development of that are vitally important,' she said. Littman also said the bill doesn't come with funding — though Rubio told the editorial board there's money for curriculum development and teacher training in Newsom's proposed budget. In short, the arguments against AB1121 are nonsensical. 'These are children's lives,' Rubio, a longtime elementary school teacher who was herself an English language learner, said. 'If they miss something in their educational career, it does affect them for the rest of their life.' That lawmakers have been wrangling for years over whether to even consider such a common-sense bill is absurd. How can California Democrats say with a straight face they're governing responsibly when kids here are being outperformed by students in far poorer school districts in the Deep South? How long will they continue to use abstract ideological concepts like local control to protect policies that clearly aren't working? On the Thursday legislative deadline for education-related bills to be scheduled for a hearing, Rubio's bill still hadn't been put on the calendar for the Assembly Education Committee. But, at the last minute, a deal was struck with Assembly leadership for a compromise bill — the details of which haven't yet been made public. It's comical that a compromise was necessary for such a critically important bill to even stand a chance of passing through the California Legislature. What, exactly, is politically challenging about ensuring that our youngest kids learn to read? Isn't California ranking far below Mississippi for early childhood literacy enough of a wake-up call? Mississippi, incidentally, also had the lowest rate of homelessness in the United States in 2023. It's a sad day when struggling families who want to stay housed and ensure their kids learn to read have a better shot in the dark-red Deep South than they do in California.
San Francisco Chronicle
26-04-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Is California capable of prying loose Trump's grip on the nation? The fate of this bill will tell us
Following resounding losses by Democrats in the November election, party leaders such as Gov. Gavin Newsom have sought to align themselves with the burgeoning 'abundance' movement, which contends that blue states will only win back voters if they can prove their ability to govern effectively — including by providing access to basic goods, such as high-quality public education and widely available housing. How's that effort going in California? In short — not well. If you pay attention to California politics, you likely heard about the death this week of SB677, a bill to make it easier to split single-family-home lots for duplexes or fourplexes, and the near killing of SB79, which would allow multifamily housing up to seven stories near major transit stops — both from state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. The bills' primary assailant was state Sen. Aisha Wahab, D-Fremont, chair of the Senate Housing Committee, who has leaned on the tired refrain that efforts to streamline new housing production are 'giveaways for developers,' partly because they reduce the ability of local governments to weigh in on projects. Wahab's insistence on fighting for California's failed status quo on housing, even as American democracy sinks around us, rightly drew outrage. But for an even bleaker example of how state leaders are failing to rise to the urgency of the moment, Californians should consider the response to AB1121 from Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park (Los Angeles County). The seemingly uncontroversial bill would require California teachers in transitional kindergarten through fifth grade to be trained in the 'science of reading,' which emphasizes the importance of foundational literacy skills, including phonics — or sounding out words. It would also require schools to adopt an evidence-based reading curriculum in transitional kindergarten through eighth grade. Backed by decades of interdisciplinary research, this approach has proven to be particularly effective in teaching young kids how to read — regardless of their mother language. California schools and teachers currently have a fair amount of leeway in the curriculum they use, and the state doesn't track those materials or how effective they are. But a review of more than 300 of the state's largest school districts conducted by the California Reading Coalition found that fewer than 2% use programs aligned with the science of reading. The results speak for themselves. Nearly 60% of our third graders didn't meet state standards for English language arts and literacy in the 2023-24 school year. Meanwhile, poverty-stricken red states such as Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have surged ahead of California in childhood literacy after adopting mandatory foundational literacy teaching and training. That California childhood literacy rates have fallen significantly beneath those of the poorest state in the nation should be considered a stain on the progressive values this state claims to stand for. Yet last year, California Democrats silently killed a bipartisan bill to mandate the science of reading, refusing to even discuss the topic publicly. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi, D-Rolling Hills Estates (Los Angeles County), who leads the Assembly Education Committee (and is running for state superintendent of public instruction next year) tabled the bill without a hearing amid fierce opposition from influential interest groups — including the California Teachers Association and Californians Together, which advocates for English language learners. Yes, you read that correctly — ensuring California kids receive the most effective reading lessons didn't even merit a discussion among Democrats in the face of union opposition. Rubio's bill faced similar hurdles this year. Most enraging is that the state's English language arts framework already underscores that foundational reading skills 'should be given high priority' among other strategies in early literacy instruction. State law also requires teacher candidates to demonstrate their fluency in evidence-based foundational reading methods to receive their credential. Meanwhile, literacy rates at some of California's lowest-performing schools improved significantly after adopting this curriculum. So what's behind the reluctance to implement this approach more widely? Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, told the editorial board that Rubio's bill was too narrowly focused on foundational skills and didn't take into account the needs of English language learners. But nothing in Rubio's bill precludes teachers from incorporating other reading strategies and approaches — it merely codifies the state's existing stance, which is that foundational skills should be prioritized. Meanwhile, Leslie Littman, vice president of the California Teachers Association, argued the bill would weaken local control over education. 'Teacher input, teacher voice, in the decision-making process with the curriculum and the development of that are vitally important,' she said. Littman also said the bill doesn't come with funding — though Rubio told the editorial board there's money for curriculum development and teacher training in Newsom's proposed budget. In short, the arguments against AB1121 are nonsensical. 'These are children's lives,' Rubio, a longtime elementary school teacher who was herself an English language learner, said. 'If they miss something in their educational career, it does affect them for the rest of their life.' That lawmakers have been wrangling for years over whether to even consider such a common-sense bill is absurd. How can California Democrats say with a straight face they're governing responsibly when kids here are being outperformed by students in far poorer school districts in the Deep South? How long will they continue to use abstract ideological concepts like local control to protect policies that clearly aren't working? On the Thursday legislative deadline for education-related bills to be scheduled for a hearing, Rubio's bill still hadn't been put on the calendar for the Assembly Education Committee. But, at the last minute, a deal was struck with Assembly leadership for a compromise bill — the details of which haven't yet been made public. It's comical that a compromise was necessary for such a critically important bill to even stand a chance of passing through the California Legislature. What, exactly, is politically challenging about ensuring that our youngest kids learn to read? Isn't California ranking far below Mississippi for early childhood literacy not enough of a wake-up call? Mississippi, incidentally, also had the lowest rate of homelessness in the United States in 2023. It's a sad day when struggling families who want to stay housed and ensure their kids learn to read have a better shot in the dark-red Deep South than they do in California.
