4 ms·

We can fix it, though. Eventually there will be enough tech workers able to vote in the city that we can push through changes to the zoning rules. We just hav

We can fix it, though. Eventually there will be enough tech workers able to vote in the city that we can push through changes to the zoning rules. We just have to: a) get to that point and b) be politically engaged enough to actually go and do it. The SOPA reaction has given me hope about b).

wmf 14y ago
But do the tech workers actually want zoning changes?
- rabidsnail 14y ago
  If we stay in the grow-or-die culture that we've been in for the past 15 years, then the other option is to move. You can't grow if you can't hire, and you can't hire if your employees don't have any place to live.
rayiner 14y ago
I don't know if you can fix it, or at least not in the short term, no matter what kind of critical mass you get. Housing stock has a lifecycle of 50-100 years. Anti-development policies can create a "housing stock debt." In New York, which doesn't apply rent stabilization to any housing built since 1974, 60% of housing units are still rent-stabilized!
- rabidsnail 14y ago
  New York hasn't grown nearly as fast as San Francisco, so most of the existing housing stock is adequate. Everybody has a price at which they'll sell, and as more people arrive wanting housing more property owners will get offers from developers that are too good to turn down.
mc32 14y ago
I can only hope you're right. The history of the supes though is that they pander to the people who want to "conserve the rich history and diversity of the city". It sounds nice, but what it results in is paralysis and band-aids (for example in the provisions to grant building permits is to build "affordable" housing.) So the builders build million dollar condos (who only few can afford) and the below-market condos -who only the near destitute qualify for). That leaves most people competing for the few actually (non subsidized) affordable places, which due to pressures are the leftovers (substandard inventory -old, needing repairs, lousy areas, etc). I have little respect and some disdain for the supes . They have driven the city's progress into the ground. Anywhere else, these policies would have driven the place into a Detroit West, but they get propped up the the surrounding valleys' wealth. I could only wish the city was governed a bit like SJ --without the sprawl.
dangrover 14y ago
I've been taling with friends about organizing a voting bloc to get fellow tech workers in SF to vote on critical issues that affect our lives (rent control, zoning, homelessness, transit). Such an important part of the city's revenue base is virtually unrepresented in policy decisions. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED: shoot me an email at dan@dangrover.com and if there's enough interest, I'll try to coordinate a meeting/discussion!

wmf 14y ago

But do the tech workers actually want zoning changes?

rabidsnail 14y ago
If we stay in the grow-or-die culture that we've been in for the past 15 years, then the other option is to move. You can't grow if you can't hire, and you can't hire if your employees don't have any place to live.

rayiner 14y ago

I don't know if you can fix it, or at least not in the short term, no matter what kind of critical mass you get. Housing stock has a lifecycle of 50-100 years. Anti-development policies can create a "housing stock debt." In New York, which doesn't apply rent stabilization to any housing built since 1974, 60% of housing units are still rent-stabilized!

rabidsnail 14y ago
New York hasn't grown nearly as fast as San Francisco, so most of the existing housing stock is adequate. Everybody has a price at which they'll sell, and as more people arrive wanting housing more property owners will get offers from developers that are too good to turn down.

mc32 14y ago

I can only hope you're right. The history of the supes though is that they pander to the people who want to "conserve the rich history and diversity of the city". It sounds nice, but what it results in is paralysis and band-aids (for example in the provisions to grant building permits is to build "affordable" housing.) So the builders build million dollar condos (who only few can afford) and the below-market condos -who only the near destitute qualify for). That leaves most people competing for the few actually (non subsidized) affordable places, which due to pressures are the leftovers (substandard inventory -old, needing repairs, lousy areas, etc). I have little respect and some disdain for the supes . They have driven the city's progress into the ground. Anywhere else, these policies would have driven the place into a Detroit West, but they get propped up the the surrounding valleys' wealth. I could only wish the city was governed a bit like SJ --without the sprawl.

dangrover 14y ago

I've been taling with friends about organizing a voting bloc to get fellow tech workers in SF to vote on critical issues that affect our lives (rent control, zoning, homelessness, transit). Such an important part of the city's revenue base is virtually unrepresented in policy decisions. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED: shoot me an email at dan@dangrover.com and if there's enough interest, I'll try to coordinate a meeting/discussion!