3 ms·
FWIW I think it would be illegal if Google tried to make the housing exclusive to its employees in the same way that the buses are.
by iandanforth 7y ago
FWIW I think it would be illegal if Google tried to make the housing exclusive to its employees in the same way that the buses are.
- ChuckMcM 7y agoSo far in my quick bit of research since this story came up I have not found a law that would prevent it. There are laws about discrimination based on race, religion, Etc. but not about employee / non-employee. I have yet to find either a California law or Sunnyvale city ordinance that would disallow an owner from preferentially selling or leasing a house to someone who was employed by a specific entity, even if that entity was themselves.
- iandanforth 7y agoInteresting looks like there is a specific permitting process for Employee Housing Programs (http://www.hcd.ca.gov/building-standards/employee-housing/index.shtml http://www.hcd.ca.gov/building-standards/employee-housing/in...). I hope that any zoning decisions are made with a written declaration of intent to / not to apply for such a permit.
- ChuckMcM 7y agoThat is super awesome, thank you! It isn't clear to me reading section 17005.5 [1] how exactly you trigger this law. For example section (b) which says you have to have at least 200 homes in a single community to be considered. That seems like a pretty big loophole to drive through. Now I have to motivate myself to walk over to the reference section of the library to see if there is any case law associated with this stuff that will add insight. [1] http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=HSC§ionNum=17005.5 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection....