Hey New Life Family,
I hope you all are doing well! I write you because as we speak, the state legislature is conducting its final business before they go on recess at the end of August. Thus, the next two weeks are the closing stretch for bills to get voted on in 2022, including some crucial housing bills that would significantly move the ball forward on making housing more affordable. There are many good bills, but two, in particular, I want to highlight, both because their impact is potentially considerable, and they could go either way when they come up for a vote in the coming weeks!
1) Parking Reform (AB 2097)
As you may know, this is a subject I care about, as I have written about it here and here. For those unfamiliar, what is vital to know is that parking minimums are requirements that cities put on new development and small businesses that drive up their costs. The average construction cost for a new parking space in Los Angeles is #55,000, and our county already has 19 million parking spots. If you live in an apartment building, studies show that nationwide in America, 17% of your rent can be attributed to the cost of parking. If you pay $1800 for a two-bedroom, that means $300 every month probably goes to paying for parking.
Now, you may like your parking spots and think that it is a worthwhile cost. In a world with mandated parking, developments (especially for middle-class Angelinos) will still include parking even when cities don't require parking. But not everyone is in the same life situation, which is why this not allowing people to make this choice creates a lot of waste when placed on every development city-wide. Some estimates are that 33% of parking spots in residential complexes sit empty overnight (in addition to the vast majority of commercial parking areas, which almost all sit vacant overnight). And the waste is also a tax on the poorest Angelinos, who are least likely to own cars and most likely to take the bus but still live in buildings where they are required to pay rent for their parking spots.
Removing parking minimums has been shown in San Diego to increase by 6x new affordable units built in areas near public transit. LA would almost certainly see similar benefits, which is why many folks like the LA Times have come in support of the measure. In a crisis, it’s common sense to prioritize housing people over housing cars, and our state can start doing this by passing AB 2097.
To support the bill, please call your Senator using the button below:
In addition, you can also sign our letter that we will send to our Senator’s office next Monday to show her that her constituents care about the housing crisis, and she prioritizes that over special interests.
2) Housing in Commercial Areas (AB 2011)
In addition, there is a significant opportunity to create more needed housing by repurposing land that used to be commercial (office buildings, malls, retail stores) that currently sits empty or is under-utilized. This flexibility is especially crucial in the post-pandemic era when many people have permanently shifted to work-from-home or to shopping online. So many offices or former retail stores sit empty. While finding new tenants to fill up an office or storefront might take years, people need housing right now. Many buildings could be repurposed if the city did not have strict rules limiting or outright banning housing in commercial areas. It is hard to find someone who disagrees with this idea, which can be seen by the broad coalition that supports the measure.
Part of the reason this common-sense reform has not happened is that there has been particular interest lobbying on the part of the building and trades, arguably the most powerful group in Sacramento when it comes to housing politics, who want guarantees that developers will be required to send their workers to the building and trades apprenticeship programs when currently only 1 in 6 construction workers have been to such programs (and that ratio is even lower in East LA). Thus the bill tried to compromise by including mandates for better pay for workers without requiring an entire apprenticeship requirement. However, many unions still oppose the bill because they want to ensure they profit from the apprenticeship programs.
Because of all this politics, many state lawmakers are afraid they will be targeted for retribution if they vote for the bill. The best way to overcome that is by ensuring they hear from constituents. To support the bill, please call your Senator using the button below:
Thank you all for engaging! I will give you updates as I hear them! And if you are interested in doing more on this issue, please join our churches efforts through the faith and housing coalition by filling out our form below: