SB 51: the California politics thread

well republicans apparently do vote in special elections

yeah -- I am guessing that a lot of the republicans skew older -- and it's also one of those "old people vote more than younger people" things -- like a lot of them are probably retired and voting in a special election is up there with senior discount day at IHOP in terms of things that give their dwindling days on this earth some meaning.

agree with that, but don’t see that seat going back to the democrats in november

Well it was the high water mark of a wave so probably not. Did the democrats flip a redder seat in California?

here we go

New details on the arrest of L.A. Councilman Jose Huizar in an ongoing corruption probe: https://t.co/kspBK4Cbyv

— Emily Alpert Reyes (@AlpertReyes) June 23, 2020

he tried to have his wife replace him so he could continue doing crimes according to today's indictment, but she withdrew when he was first searched, so he's being replaced by kevin de leon. there's at least a couple more council people who might be implicated, along with the mayor's office. good times.

Just came to post the ABC story (but on the LA thread).

#BREAKING Photos from the complaint show some of the cash prosecutors allege Councilman Jose Huizar and his associates received from developers to help push their projects through the city planning process. @SpecNews1SoCal pic.twitter.com/5WATbJtNef

— Natalie Brunell (@natbrunell) June 23, 2020

yeah maybe LA thread. what a world.

I love when there's photographs of big bundles of money

And they literally found the money (~$130,000) in a closet at his house.

His office and home were raided by the FBI 19 months ago, **everyone** in LA government knew he was guilty, but the culture of incumbency protection is so powerful nobody said a word until multiple guilty pleas came in. So now a sitting Councilman is in lockup. Nice work gang https://t.co/TWhi5IzWSA

— Hayes Davenport (@hayesdavenport) June 23, 2020

an extremely good point!

There is absolutely nothing that warms my heart more than $3M homes that pay about 1 to 2 iPhone Pros in property taxes per year, for an effective property tax rate of 0.03%.

1 to 2 iPhone Pros per year!

All hail #Prop13! pic.twitter.com/2Ya1ZBied8

— Next door in Silicon Valley (@nextdoorsv) May 27, 2020

caek, you seem to know what you're talking about, and I'm certainly not paying much attention to Sacramento these days - do you know if the state legislature has any momentum or likelihood or whatever to repeal or reform Prop 13 anytime soon? does Gavin have a position on it?

meanwhile I wish we could retire the prop number like a hall of famer's jersey (or just rename it the Howard Jarvis Arbitrary Assessment Initiative) so there's no more potential for ambiguity leading to things like the first failed school bond proposal in two decades (2020's Prop 13)

There’s a ballot measure this year to repeal is for commercial property! Tactically this is supposed to be the thin end of the wedge to repeal the whole thing https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_15,_Tax_on_Commercial_and_Industrial_Properties_for_Education_and_Local_Government_Funding_Initiative_(2020).

I haven’t seen any polling but a measure that seemed like a fairly easy sell a year ago when they started seems like a tougher sell in a recession, so I’m not optimistic.

ah very cool! I didn't know this was on deck for November. you're probably right about any momentum being spoiled though.

Lmao this thread rules

Jaw on the floor listening to SD planning commissioner @mcboomhower light up a neighborhood group opposing a new duplex. "When you say 'pride of ownership' that means 'we don't want renters. If you can't afford to buy in our lovely little neighborhood, we don't want you here.'"

— Kenneth Stahl 🌇 (@kookie13) July 31, 2020

awesome

need more of this

they are opposing -- a duplex -- good grief.

meanwhile, I get fb ads for houses and real estate a lot, and I got one yesterday advertising a duplex that is "planned to be vacant" at 9th and Wood in West Oakland. ... Later that evening I had to drop stuff in the mail at the main post office a few blocks away from said address, so I ended up driving by this spot. ... I had forgotten the exact character of 9th and Wood and the few blocks up/down from it ... but when I drove by, I was like, OH SHIIIT YEAH the corner of 8th and Wood is where the liquor store is where everyone hangs out across the street -- some hanging, some slinging ... and the block of 9th and Wood is the frequent site of stuffed animal infused altars to victims of "gun violence" ... and I forget what my point is here, but, yeah, duplexes ... does the neighborhood group in SD believe that the inherent nature of "the duplex" will transplant the people and problems of 9th and Wood in West Oakland to their neighborhood??

booming comment from boomhower! stickin it to the NIMBYs in the name of strict municipal code interpretation

as it happens I'm working on a fancy mile-long grade-separated bike lane construction project that will be going to that very same La Jolla community planning group for approval in about six months. by the sound of it he may not be as supportive as he is for this duplex, since the construction of the bike lane involves multiple deviations from the municipal code for the construction of a retaining wall and a quarter acre of wetland impacts resulting from having to widen the road itself to meet Caltrans code for the installation of a bike lane!

no big deal if the community planning group rejects it, we've only spent a few years/millions designing it already

Regarding Prop 13:

Prior to 1978, corporate landowners paid about two-thirds of statewide property tax revenues; homeowners paid about one-third. Proposition 13 flipped that equation to where homeowners paid two-thirds and corporations one-third.

Read more here: https://www.sanluisobispo.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article156302674.html#storylink=cpy

xp - CA muni code is impressively convoluted and in some cases requires a lot of mental gymnastics to try and accommodate all the provisions in all the separate code chapters! ... A few months ago I spent quality time trying to figure out what exactly are the code requirements for live/work housing ... geez. But I am definitely rooting for you, burrito!! I haven't spent much time in that area of SD, but your project sounds super necessary and useful, considering the terrain and sprawl

appreciate the rooting, and it is a good project. mostly. unless you start thinking about other ways the money could be spent. but that's none of my business

CA muni code is impressively convoluted

tell me about it!

https://i.imgur.com/n1lLLM8.png

Okay, I'm dying to know ... what does Section 143.0150 say?!!!!!!

*popcorn.gif*

any odds/betting sites have this action?

§143.0150 Deviations from Environmentally Sensitive Lands Regulations
Plans submitted in accordance with this section shall, to the maximum extent feasible,
comply with the regulations of this division. If a proposed development does not
comply with all applicable development regulations of this division and a deviation is
requested as indicated in Table 143-01A, the decision maker may approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Site Development Permit in accordance
with the following:
(a) Deviations from the regulations of this division may be granted only if the
decision maker makes the findings in Section 126.0504(c).
(b) Deviations from the Supplemental Regulations for Special Flood Hazard
Areas in Section 143.0146 may be granted only if the decision maker makes
the findings in Section 126.0504(d).
(c) Within the Coastal Overlay Zone, deviations from the Environmentally
Sensitive Lands Regulations may be granted only if the decision maker makes
the findings in Section 126.0708.
(d) Deviations to the wetland regulations in Section 143.0141(b) shall not be
granted unless the development is located outside of the Coastal Overlay Zone
and qualifies to be processed as one of the three options set forth in the
following regulations and in accordance with the Biology Guidelines in the
Land Development Manual:
(1) Essential Public Projects Option
(A) A deviation may only be requested for an Essential Public
Project where no feasible alternative exists that would avoid
impacts to wetlands.
(B) For the purpose of this section, Essential Public Projects shall
include:
(i) Any public project identified in an adopted land use
plan or implementing document and identified on the
Essential Public Projects List adopted by Resolution
No. R-307377 as Appendix III to the Biology
Guidelines; or
Ch. Art. Div.
14 3 1 47
San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 14: General Regulations
(2-2020)
(ii) Linear infrastructure, including but not limited to major
roads and land use plan circulation element roads and
facilities including bike lanes, water and sewer
pipelines including appurtenances, and stormwater
conveyance systems including appurtenances; or
(iii) Maintenance of existing public infrastructure; or
(iv) State and federally mandated projects.
(2) Economic Viability Option
A deviation may be requested to preserve economically viable use of a
property that would otherwise be deprived by a strict application of the
regulations. Such a deviation shall be the minimum necessary to
achieve economically viable use of the property and shall avoid
wetland resources to the maximum extent practicable.
(3) Biologically Superior Option
(A) A deviation may be requested to achieve a superior biological
result which would provide long term biological benefit and a
net increase in quality and viability (functions and value),
relative to existing conditions or the project originally
proposed by the applicant, and long term biological benefit.
(B) Wetland resources that would be impacted by the project shall
be demonstrated to be of low biological quality.
(Amended 4-22-2002 by O-19051 N.S.; effective 10-8-2002.)
(Amended 5-7-2012 by O-20161 N.S.; effective 6-6-2012.)
(Amended 2-9-2018 by O-20899 N.S.; effective 3-11-2018.)

does anyone want to learn about affordable housing density bonus regulations?

If Kamala Harris is elected vice president, Gavin Newsom gets to appoint a new California senator. Who could it be? ⁦@philwillon⁩ https://t.co/SFcaqRvaWl

— Laura J. Nelson 🦅 (@laura_nelson) August 11, 2020

Newsom himself!

he wants to be president

yeah no way is Gavin gonna give up being governor to be a senator ...

I think it's gonna be either:

Schiff
Lee
Porter
Breed
or
Newsom

Need some oddsmakers to chime in!

i guess it's politically impossible for him to pick the person who is in some ways next in line by virtue of his strong performance in the runoff with feinstein, i.e. kevin de leon because, well, he tried to primary feinstein.

it better not be garcetti

it's going to be that turd schiff isn't it

what about the woman who lost to Harris in the election -- it was super close?

though my preference would be Libby Schaaf -- take my mayor ... please!

though if he picks Barbara Lee, then maybe we can "upgrade" one of our less appealing City Council members ... oh Lynette G-M ... please seek higher office.

though it would be "hilarious" if Gavin chose his patron, Willie Brown ...

lol

Given that Uber rides have cratered during the pandemic, I wonder if people will care about this threat as much as they would have, say, a year ago https://t.co/MtQrfcUYdI

— Laura J. Nelson 🦅 (@laura_nelson) August 12, 2020

iirc spending (almost entirely from uber/lyft/doordash etc.) on the AB5 ballot measure is ~$110m. spending on prop 15 (the actual big deal about split roll property tax) is like 10% of that. to zuck's credit, almost all the pro-prop 15 money comes from his foundation.

Anyway I nominate caek to be our senator.

Haha thank u I hereby repeal proposition 13 and make it illegal to enforce “no soccer” rules at public parks.

For anyone enjoying the rolling blackout drama, the iso today app is very well done!

The stakes are too high to sit out this election. This November we will put #SchoolsAndCommunitiesFirst by voting #YesOn15. Thank you @JoeBiden for being an early champion of #YesOn15! pic.twitter.com/0q7kHKj5Pu

— Yes on Prop 15! (Schools & Communities First) (@Schools1stCA) August 21, 2020

you know who hasn't endorsed prop 15? the governor.

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’d vote yes on 19 I think.

so why is Lyft pulling out now when their ballot measure hasn't even been decided?

They’re not. They got a stay in court on ab5 enforcement yesterday.

meanwhile Doordash is sending out "sympathize with us" emails about how horrible it is that the mean state wants them to classify their workers as employees

Are absentee ballots mailed out yet?

I haven’t seen any yet

Looking forward to reminding these people that trump said the quiet part out loud for them

Here, a liberal homeowner and retired teacher in San Jose who converted a 1930s triplex into a single-family home, grapples with his stance on single-family zoning and President Trump's embrace of it for exclusionary reasons https://t.co/lrlR41Y7Tp pic.twitter.com/XM6Lm0oE7T

— Liam Dillon (@dillonliam) August 21, 2020