urban Boomer homeowners... have consistently—and incredibly successfully—blocked construction of affordable housing This very premise is false. "Affordable" h

urban Boomer homeowners... have consistently—and incredibly successfully—blocked construction of affordable housing This very premise is false. "Affordable" housing is, by definition, housing built and sold at a loss of income on the part of the developer. "Boomers", individually or collectively, lack any authority to stop such developments -- only governmental bodies have such authority. The actual story is that such "housing advocates" try to extort the dedication of part/most of any development to be artificially low priced. If they would just let development happen at market rates, the overall supply would be increased, thereby lowering prices across the board for that dwelling type in that area. Anyway, it goes on: "(The Ghost Ship) warehouse that had been informally turned into an artist collective and residence" Uh, no. It wasn't just illegally subdivided and ridiculously dangerous, it was illegal for anybody to live there at all. If a city only builds upscale units, there’s nothing for working people. That assumes that every "upscale unit" is sold only to a new arrival. In fact, "movin' on up" creates a chain reaction of others moving up into each's prior residence. Urban Boomer homeowners are part of this trend, and they’ve made enormous profits Not until they sell, they haven't... and once they sell and move, they aren't around to wield mythic powers against development, are they? Neighborhood councils and homeowners associations ... have no actual power to stop development, regardless of its targeted demographic. "I point out the HALA program because many states bar inclusionary zoning. In San Francisco we require a percentage of units in a new building to be rented or sold at below market rate..." So, zoning is only "inclusionary" if BMR units are demanded of a developer? Forcing BMR losses upon developers and "zoning" are completely different things. using publicly owned land for affordable housing As opposed to San Jose, which just gave away a bunch of prime parcels to Google for well below market for office space in the Montgomery/Autumn corridor, including no housing whatsoever, BMR or otherwise.