The naughty nine housing bills are down to seven. It is time to stop the remaining seven bills. Don’t crush single family zoning and local control. 73% of the country lives in single family home, and over 80% would like to have a single family home. I strongly believe in the right of cities to determine their own zoning and to control their own destiny. After all, they have to live with the results.

Below are the “naughty nine” from Livable California. You should become familiar with them and urge your elected officials to oppose the remaining seven, as do I.

“SB 1120 (by Scott Wiener and Toni Atkins)Crushes single-family zoning, a threat to 8 million homeowners at all income levels. State Sen. Scott Wiener has called yards and single-family homes “immoral.

” SB 1120 allows 4 market-rate homes where a one home now stands (it allows 8 units, if cities have local city “granny flat” laws). Requires NO affordability! Opens California to speculation frenzy.

SB 902 (by Scott Wiener):Allows a majority on any city council to overturn voter-approved ballot measures that protect open space, shorelines and other lands — killing a 108-year-old California voter right. AND allows any city council to rezone “any parcel” to 10-unit luxury apartments, overriding all other zoning, inviting upheaval in older, diverse, multi-family areas. Requires NO affordability! Opens California to speculation frenzy.

SB 995 (by Wiener and Atkins):This phony housing bill actually rewards huge $15M commercial projects with housing stuck on the side! While enriching commercial developers, it requires only 15% of its housing units to be affordable. It weakens CEQA, our environmental law.SB 1085 (by Nancy Skinner):This bill was substantially amended on July 29 in the Assembly Housing Committee after Livable California and many groups criticized it for CUTTING IN HALF the legislature’s commitment to affordable housing in “Density Bonus” projects. We will UPDATE THIS SPACE as soon as we get a chance to read and analyze the amended SB 1085.

AB 725: (by Buffy Wicks and Scott Wiener)A severe threat to 400+ cities who have not attracted enough housing to hit state-ordered growth targets known as “RHNA.” AB 725 bring density and upheaval to low-density areas whose residents have never even heard of “RHNA.” “RHNA” was once a helpful growth-forecasting tool. Now it’s used (especially by Scott Wiener) as a weapon to force density on communities.

AB 1279 (by Richard Bloom): THIS BILL IS NOW DEADA year AFTER this radical bill becomes law, a “committee” would identify streets as “Opportunity Areas” where 50-unit to 120-unit apartments could be built, ignoring zoning as long as affordable units are included. OR developers can pay a woefully insufficient “in lieu” fee to AVOID building affordable housing, and then built 10-unit luxury apartments on single-family and low-density streets in these unsuspecting “Areas.” All without a single hearing. This is wrong.

AB 2345 (by Lorena Gonzalez and David Chiu)Allows developers to add 50% in “Density Bonus” size to a building if they agree to provide more affordable housing units than required under “Density Bonus.” To create these huge buildings, developers can ignore city controls on size, parking, setbacks, side yards, trees, and other local standards.

AB 3040 (by David Chiu):It’s a “Sophie’s Choice”: Cities comply with AB 3040 by sacrificing single-family homes older than 15 years — think South L.A., East L.A., and diverse older suburbs — to satisfy state growth dictates known as “RHNA.” OR cities can refuse to comply and try to meet these growth dictates by relying on the state Density Bonus program. Stay with us here, folks: Unfortunately, the Density Bonus program is a FAIL, preventing cities from approving even close to the number of affordable units required by “RHNA.” Over 400 out of 482 cities won’t make the “RHNA” targets. When cities fail, a divisive and punitive law by Scott Wiener, called SB 35, will let developers ignore many local rules to build as they wish. Yes, “Sophie’s Choice.”

AB 3107 (by Richard Bloom and Phil Ting): THIS BILL IS NOW DEADWreaks havoc by allowing apartment towers where cafés, shops or businesses now stand, even if adjacent to homes. The new towers would contain 20% affordable units. Each city faces a different fate — the bill arbitrarily allow heights that match the tallest height allowed in any commercial or residential area up to ½ mile away. In L.A. it means 9-story apartments citywide. In Inglewood, 75 feet would be allowed. In Manhattan Beach, it wipes out a residential 30-foot height limit to allow 99 feet. We predict chaos.”