SB 51: the California politics thread

xxp - the only remotely valid concern I've heard from the Anti-Prop 15 side are worries about property tax increases being passed through to commercial tenants, which there really isn't that much to say about. Will property owners do this? If the leases with their tenants allow it, then probably.

Quincie

here are my ballot measure endorsements if you want to vote the caek slate

15: eliminate part of california's insane, unique property tax break, yes
16: repeal law banning affirmative action, yes
17: allow people on parole to vote, yes
18: allow people who will be 18 years old by general to vote in primary, yes
20: classify more crimes as felonies, collect more DNA, no
21: allow more local rent control, yes
22: undo law that made uber/lyft/etc. drivers employees, no
24: more privacy online, yes
25: replace cash bail (which sucks) with (algorithmic?) risk assesements (which also suck, but maybe a bit less), yes

no opinion: 14 (stem cell money), 23 (dialysis clinics), 19 (technical thing about inheritance of property tax breaks that bundles in some weird stuff about fires and honestly seems kind of weird given who is supporting it)

I’m now a weak yes on 19 and an even stronger no on 22 than when I wrote that.

thanks for reposting that summary, caek

California AB5 is a shitshow, and the condescension of its primary sponsor has been irritating in the extreme. kudos to the authors of Prop 22 for coming up with something so much worse I can't wait to vote it down.

yes thx caek, helpful to have things summarized down to their essence

you now have to press "confirm" below a message that says "yes on prop 22" to use uber. holy shit https://t.co/8WVgtQuqh7

— chris arvin 💕 🌁 (@chrisarvinsf) September 28, 2020

ugh

heil uber ...

I really want 16 to win, but it seems to have little support, and Asian groups are opposing it, and this shit didn't help: https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/no-on-prop-16-campaign-highlights-anti-asian-racism-facebook-mistakenly-bans-for-hate-speech/.

This guy is worst thing that has happened to the NIKBY movement in years

LOL -- Trump claims (absurdly) that Biden will destroy the suburbs by "abolishing single-family zoning" pic.twitter.com/IyblGkivwW

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 1, 2020

*NIMBY

I don’t know about 23 or 24. Leaning towards no on 23. Of course I support internet privacy, but even the EFF is against 24?? Idk more research needed

is the EFF bad?

it's a mixed bag

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/07/why-eff-doesnt-support-cal-prop-24

This November, Californians will be called upon to vote on a ballot initiative called the California Privacy Rights Act, or Proposition 24. EFF does not support it; nor does EFF oppose it.

ah ok my bad

well, they have some pretty good arguments that it may be net a bad proposition, so i think it's worth considering.

they have a history of libertarianism though, so i'm not 100% sure how seriously to take them on things like this.

thanks, caek

This is an extremely well done piece illustrating bureaucracy https://t.co/Sqz5tg0fGX

— Eliot Brown (@eliotwb) October 3, 2020

We need to get our windows replaced, and we had to pay an “expediter” to get the permit pulled. Without her, we were looking at basically no estimate for when they could get it pulled. With her it happened in one day. Such BS.
(I’m in SF)

Who's paying for that Prop? California's $502,000,000+ ballot measure election donor list is topped by DaVita and Uber. Realtors, unions, landlords, and business associations are also big on the list.

Data is from the @CA_FPPC's Top Contributor list at https://t.co/wWsMaT35Hi pic.twitter.com/JcltL56hmE

— Alfred Twu (@alfred_twu) October 3, 2020

We need to get our windows replaced, and we had to pay an “expediter” to get the permit pulled. Without her, we were looking at basically no estimate for when they could get it pulled. With her it happened in one day. Such BS.
(I’m in SF)

I learned a hilarious thing about San Francisco and permits the other day (via a Zoning Admin hearing for a project my org is helping legalize -- my job actually involves permit expediting)-- that even if you are going to rent a commercial building (or portion), you have to get a building permit, even if you aren't going to do any construction. There isn't a separate zoning permit (clearance) process like there is in other cities (e.g. Oakland).

given what I know about San Francisco's requirements for grid-tied solar permits, that does not surprise me. don't even get me started on Daly City!

Also, my org had a similar experience with SF DBI where we submitted plans and everything for the building permit online, as per their instructions, and then later got an email saying, essentially, "we lost your stuff" that had been submitted online ...

xp sleeve -- my fave Bay Area small city story was ilxor akm's about Berkeley and the bathroom light switches.

Though back in the pre-covid era, when you would go to SF DBI in person (which I have done), I was actually impressed because they had a system where they would actually text you when your number was about to come up! Like, you weren't stuck waiting in the designated waiting area until your number was called. You could actually do other things! ... In case you had any doubt, Oakland does not have this feature. In Oakland, you sit and wait. And wait. And wait.

But even once those are resolved, the plans will still need approval from a mechanical plan checker at the Department of Building Inspection, the Fire Department, Public Works and the Department of Public Health.

This part is normal. because:
He hired an architect to draw up plans for upgraded electrical and plumbing systems, a front counter and some kitchen equipment. No structural changes were planned, and the outside of the building wouldn’t be touched.

upgrades to electrical and plumbing are basically -- you need a mechanical permit and plan check. Fire can be super simple. Health Dept -- duh -- you are serving food. Idk what Public Works has to do here that's kinda odd, but ...

sometimes i do wonder if i suffer from some sort of stockholm "this is fine" syndrome about these things tho lol

I'm still dealing with the light switch btw, almost a year later and my permit is about to expire. The ordinance mandates that the switch have an auto off and no auto on. So I failed last inspection because it had an auto on.

omg !!!!

Who's paying for that Prop? California's $502,000,000+ ballot measure election donor list is topped by DaVita and Uber. Realtors, unions, landlords, and business associations are also big on the list.

Data is from the @CA_FPPC's Top Contributor list at https://t.co/wWsMaT35Hi pic.twitter.com/JcltL56hmE

— Alfred Twu (@alfred_twu) October 3, 2020

Thread:

It is my burden and my tragedy that I do indeed understand what Trump is trying to say here. Behold, the unholy mishmash of California water policy, salmon, agriculture, and of course the unfortunate delta smelt. A THREAD: https://t.co/S6ParBisp8

— Miriam Goldstein (@MiriamGoldste) October 9, 2020

ooh good thread! i kinda wondered if that was what he was driving at, though my understanding was vvvvvv limited lol

Miriam is awesome -- her husband and I were housemates in college!

wow!

she was the person who informed me at a dinner party (a little over 20 years ago) that my sociopathic ex from college was engaged to married.

Also: I discovered a strong enclave of anti Prop 15 people among my fb friends

When the New York Times is endorsing the no side of your California ballot measure you’ve fucked up

"It seems that these companies would sooner destroy their own businesses than grant workers the dignity of comprehensive benefits, guaranteed wages or unemployment insurance." https://t.co/WLm43Q32dl

— Matt Pearce 🦅 (@mattdpearce) October 13, 2020

aiui these companies do not have businesses, in the sense of profit-making enterprises

spent a fair amount of time this weekend discussing/debating prop 15 with anti-15 folks -- partly around the issue of "does live/work housing qualify as residential" ... does it qualify in its entirety or only in part ...

Does their live/work housing draw in >$3M per year? Do they own or rent? Prop 15 does not apply to residential or agricultural properties. Should your homies or their landlords be making more than $3M/Y, shouldn’t they just pay their fair share of property tax? Statewide median income is closer to $59k (last I checked)

*sigh* yeah, some of these dudes are definitely libertarian bros and the fact that the tax money will benefit poor people in their cities are totally absent from their considerations.

The point they keep raising is the fact that, due to the nature of many commercial leases, the landlords will pass the increases down to the tenants who will then be unable to afford the rents on their shops and studios.

The big question for me (outside of how live/work is categorized and whether "use as residence" requires the building be thoroughly up to code with all the permits) is how the buildings are assessed -- how is this current value determined.

The point they keep raising is the fact that, due to the nature of many commercial leases, the landlords will pass the increases down to the tenants who will then be unable to afford the rents on their shops and studios.

this is not how rates the markets sets rents. rents are set by supply and demand. you'd think a libertarian would know this. proof of this: commercial rates did not go down after the passage of prop 13.

we should not mess up live/work/own if we can help it, but tbh i'm fine with quite a lot of collateral damage in service of the goal of dismantling prop 13 (i.e. stopping wealth transfer from young poor people to old rich people), and how many people actually own and live in commercial space right now? it can't be that many. a few thousand statewide?

first sentence there should be "this is not how the markets sets rents."

(also i don't actually believe that claim myself, but it's intellectually incoherent to be a market libertarian, to know that rents did not go down after prop 13 passed, and to claim that rents will go up when part of it is repealed.)

It seems like Prop 13 is a classic American scheme to transform potential tax revenue into bank profits. Lower property tax means people can afford more expensive houses so housing costs go up and banks make more interest income. Am I missing something?

in the sense that prop 13 is part of the reason housing is so expensive (and therefore mortgage writing for a percentage of that is so profitable). but prop 13 actually hurts lenders too, because it makes it harder to move once you have a house (hence prop 19, which they support).

the real problem with prop 13 is not that it drives housing prices up (but it does). it's that it's grossly unfair, and that it sacrifices a huge amount of revenue that we need to fund services like schools at the level they do in texas or new york or new jersey.

the real reason housing is expensive is not prop 13. it's that we simply don't build enough of it near jobs.

I’m hollerin https://t.co/VIBdTnhfff pic.twitter.com/smEBAObBKj

— Ask Me About Prop. 15 (@TribTowerViews) October 14, 2020

idgi

what do the different colors mean?

And also the Prop 15 supporters should keep it quiet about private property taxes since the whole idea is that 15 is a tax only on commercial properties, right?