by Lydia Poncé

a beautiful affordable housing project

California’s housing crisis is a multifaceted issue that requires a balanced approach to address. While the state needs more housing to accommodate its population, it must also protect its natural resources and vulnerable communities. SB 951, as currently drafted by Senator Scott Wiener, falls way short of achieving these goals. Instead, we need to strengthen legislative direction to local governments, we must close loopholes in coastal housing law, and ensure greater accountability for results.

The Coastal Zone, where the housing crisis is particularly acute, presents unique challenges. It is essential to balance the need for housing with protecting residents, businesses, and infrastructure from natural hazards and sea-level rise. Additionally, we must uphold the public’s constitutional right of access to the coast and conserve ecosystems. Recent changes to the California Coastal Act and other laws, such as SB 1, SB 272, and AB 30, have taken steps in the right direction by requiring local governments to prepare for climate change impacts and ensure access to nature for all Californians.

However, SB 951’s provisions to redraw the Coastal Zone boundary in San Francisco and rewrite provisions that limit the Coastal Commission’s authority, as the public appeal opportunities are concerning. There is no evidence that the Coastal Act has caused delays in housing development in San Francisco. Instead, current law allows local governments to evade accountability for affordable housing development in the Coastal Zone.

We should be eliminating the provisions that redraw the Coastal Zone boundary, and limit the Coastal Commission’s authority. Instead, we should be supporting reforms to tighten housing requirements such as:

• Closing loopholes in the 1982 Mello Act, which allows local governments to avoid protecting or developing affordable housing in the Coastal Zone. Local governments should not be able to push affordable housing three miles inland and outside the Coastal Zone.

• Require local governments to address affordable housing in their local coastal programs (LCPs). Currently, the Coastal Act allows them to avoid doing so. Requiring LCPs to address housing needs will ensure that local governments consider housing objectives while considering coastal hazards and public access.

• Provide for accountability: The Coastal Commission should be empowered to encourage housing opportunities for extremely low, very low, and moderate-income individuals in the Coastal Zone. Historical evidence shows that the Commission was successful in securing affordable housing before its authority was repealed in 1981.

• We must land on a financial definition for affordable housing as using the median income is racially biased and not truly representative of today’s economic challenges, i.e. post Covid shut down, inflation, and job markets.

• Amending SB 951 along these lines would better meet housing objectives while ensuring that local governments continue to address statewide climate, access, and environmental goals. Our legislators must oppose SB 951 as currently drafted but stand ready to work with legislators to identify alternative language that addresses these concerns.

• There are too many ‘off site’ replacement units – promised and never built, specifically in Venice. These off-site replacement units were written into approvals of market housing, as applicants reported they could not afford the replacement Mello unit(s) in Venice. Somewhere, 20 miles outside of Venice, there several voids unfulfilled. We must recover these

Mello units and hold the permit applicants accountable.

Do we truly have dual jurisdiction protection currently?

Lastly, the California Coastal Commission Environmental Policy – requires Tribal Consultation and Tribal Consent. (CCC EJP) These two, consultation and consent, are different policy requirements, however, these are **** to ensure thorough review of future developments and projects. The racial and social justice is paramount to achieve environmental justice and these were written with great consideration regarding 7 generations forward, everyone, including the winged, finned, four legged, other two legged, and creepy crawlers, seen and not seen… our Natural Relatives are more than deserving of an environment to live healthy and thrive.

As Indigenous People, we believe in the Rights of Nature and Natural Law…. It’s time we become a responsible California Community with connections that are nurtured and cared for… all 7 generations forward require this.

The unwritten law to protect, defend and honor our Natural Relatives, land, water and the very air we breathe is protocol. It is our responsibility and a requirement for Indigenous People, double these commitments for the California Coastal Indigenous.

Be a better Relative:

We cannot eliminate the coastal act and other regulations as it is highly likely Tribes will not be engaged, consulted, and our rights will be violated. We don’t need a bill pimped by a white male to eliminate protections that were years in the making to protect EJ communities, the environment and California Tribes.

WLA Ghostwriter and Lydia Poncé
¿Y Que?