4 ms·

Everybody wants to build housing, but no bureaucrat wants to give up control to saying “yes” or “no” to projects. We need some radical anti-bureaucracy candida

Everybody wants to build housing, but no bureaucrat wants to give up control to saying “yes” or “no” to projects. We need some radical anti-bureaucracy candidates, but there’s not good overlap with the local ideological demographic. Stalemate.

lazide 4y ago
Near as I can tell, it's due to radical ideological splits among the different power bases, and little in the way of shared culture/values. Some prominent ones being the Latinos, Chinese, Japanese, Tech, Finance, etc. blocs. The stakes are high enough and the blocs are big enough, it's easy to drive divisions between them and play them against each other. It lets someone who wants to point fingers at another group and fearmonger enough folks to block anything they don't want - and among the different blocs, there is no specific thing they all agree on. One classic recent example of this is Zoning for Marijuana dispensaries. For a long time post legalization, there literally were only 2 potential locations in SF you could get permitted to open one due to extreme school location distance requirements, driven partially by the Chinese bloc. [https://www.sfexaminer.com/the_fs/forum/conservative-chinese-push-for-sf-cannabis-ban-could-spark-serious-political-benefits/article_d0f843e7-75b3-5a57-b538-459b56142b64.html https://www.sfexaminer.com/the_fs/forum/conservative-chinese...] Even now, there are only ~42. [https://sfstandard.com/arts-culture/cannabis-lounge-map-marijuana-weed-dispensary-map-san-francisco/ https://sfstandard.com/arts-culture/cannabis-lounge-map-mari...] That is a ludicrously low number for a city of San Francisco's size, even if you don't know the history of San Francisco as one of the counter culture/weed cultures epicenters. Of course, during this entire time it was still easy to find weed - just not legally. There is a huge underground market that never stopped. And regardless of legality, there were no meaningful penalties except from the Feds (who have gotten a cold shoulder from SF for a VERY long time), as the local Police stopped enforcing anti-Marijuana rules consistently sometime in the 70s. California overall (and the US) is becoming more and more like San Francisco. It's like a cancer, as lack of belief in social institutions or a coherent social identity trends towards 'snitches get stitches' and 'fuck you, I got mine', which just enables predators.
huevosabio 4y ago
SF Yimby (Yimby Action chapter) [0] and GrowSF [1] are two orgs that constantly push for removing bureaucrats's discretionary power to say "yes" or "no" to projects. Yimby Action is having its main fundraising event [2] this October, if you want to meet other like minded people and push for a change (if you do, write huevosabio as your referral, I'll be there :)). [0] https://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements https://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements [1] https://growsf.org/voter-guide https://growsf.org/voter-guide [2] https://yimbyaction.org/2021/events/yimby-prom-gala-bay-area-2022/ https://yimbyaction.org/2021/events/yimby-prom-gala-bay-area...
onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
> Everybody wants to build housing This is completely false. A large portion of Bay Area home-owner voters are staunch NIMBY supporters. Even the majority of my renter friends are against development. According to them, it just makes developers rich and does nothing for rents. The amount of voters that are against development is definitely the majority.
- TulliusCicero 4y ago
  > This is completely false. A large portion of Bay Area home-owner voters are staunch NIMBY supporters. True, but it's also true that even NIMBY's are nominally for more housing somewhere. Just not, y'know, wherever they live, hence the name.
  - antognini 4y ago
    They might be better described as BANANAs --- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. You see a few ideas repeated over and over in those circles. "We don't have a housing crisis, we have an affordable housing crisis." And "We have plenty of housing, but large corporations have bought it and are keeping it vacant." They do genuinely believe that enough housing already exists, but that it just sitting empty and not going to the people that need it.
- api 4y ago
  > According to them, it just makes developers rich and does nothing for rents. How do people think these kinds of thoughts? "Food is too expensive! We have to shut down these evil farmers! Farming just makes them rich!" I mean this is on the same level of ideologically induced willful stupidity as "a woman can't get pregnant from rape."
  - prottog 4y ago
    It comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of economics, especially the role of profit.
  - guardiangod 4y ago

lazide 4y ago

Near as I can tell, it's due to radical ideological splits among the different power bases, and little in the way of shared culture/values. Some prominent ones being the Latinos, Chinese, Japanese, Tech, Finance, etc. blocs. The stakes are high enough and the blocs are big enough, it's easy to drive divisions between them and play them against each other. It lets someone who wants to point fingers at another group and fearmonger enough folks to block anything they don't want - and among the different blocs, there is no specific thing they all agree on. One classic recent example of this is Zoning for Marijuana dispensaries. For a long time post legalization, there literally were only 2 potential locations in SF you could get permitted to open one due to extreme school location distance requirements, driven partially by the Chinese bloc. [https://www.sfexaminer.com/the_fs/forum/conservative-chinese-push-for-sf-cannabis-ban-could-spark-serious-political-benefits/article_d0f843e7-75b3-5a57-b538-459b56142b64.html https://www.sfexaminer.com/the_fs/forum/conservative-chinese...] Even now, there are only ~42. [https://sfstandard.com/arts-culture/cannabis-lounge-map-marijuana-weed-dispensary-map-san-francisco/ https://sfstandard.com/arts-culture/cannabis-lounge-map-mari...] That is a ludicrously low number for a city of San Francisco's size, even if you don't know the history of San Francisco as one of the counter culture/weed cultures epicenters. Of course, during this entire time it was still easy to find weed - just not legally. There is a huge underground market that never stopped. And regardless of legality, there were no meaningful penalties except from the Feds (who have gotten a cold shoulder from SF for a VERY long time), as the local Police stopped enforcing anti-Marijuana rules consistently sometime in the 70s. California overall (and the US) is becoming more and more like San Francisco. It's like a cancer, as lack of belief in social institutions or a coherent social identity trends towards 'snitches get stitches' and 'fuck you, I got mine', which just enables predators.

huevosabio 4y ago

SF Yimby (Yimby Action chapter) [0] and GrowSF [1] are two orgs that constantly push for removing bureaucrats's discretionary power to say "yes" or "no" to projects. Yimby Action is having its main fundraising event [2] this October, if you want to meet other like minded people and push for a change (if you do, write huevosabio as your referral, I'll be there :)). [0] https://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements https://www.sfyimby.org/endorsements [1] https://growsf.org/voter-guide https://growsf.org/voter-guide [2] https://yimbyaction.org/2021/events/yimby-prom-gala-bay-area-2022/ https://yimbyaction.org/2021/events/yimby-prom-gala-bay-area...

onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago

> Everybody wants to build housing This is completely false. A large portion of Bay Area home-owner voters are staunch NIMBY supporters. Even the majority of my renter friends are against development. According to them, it just makes developers rich and does nothing for rents. The amount of voters that are against development is definitely the majority.

TulliusCicero 4y ago
> This is completely false. A large portion of Bay Area home-owner voters are staunch NIMBY supporters. True, but it's also true that even NIMBY's are nominally for more housing somewhere. Just not, y'know, wherever they live, hence the name.
- antognini 4y ago
  They might be better described as BANANAs --- Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. You see a few ideas repeated over and over in those circles. "We don't have a housing crisis, we have an affordable housing crisis." And "We have plenty of housing, but large corporations have bought it and are keeping it vacant." They do genuinely believe that enough housing already exists, but that it just sitting empty and not going to the people that need it.
api 4y ago
> According to them, it just makes developers rich and does nothing for rents. How do people think these kinds of thoughts? "Food is too expensive! We have to shut down these evil farmers! Farming just makes them rich!" I mean this is on the same level of ideologically induced willful stupidity as "a woman can't get pregnant from rape."
- prottog 4y ago
  It comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of economics, especially the role of profit.
- guardiangod 4y ago