Town Square

Post a New Topic

Pleasanton council to review state housing legislation, SB 50

Original post made on Jan 20, 2020

The Pleasanton City Council is set to talk Tuesday about one of the most controversial housing legislation proposals under consideration this year in Sacramento, Senate Bill 50.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, January 20, 2020, 9:24 PM

Comments (4)

6 people like this
Posted by It's the corporations, stupid
a resident of Canyon Creek
on Jan 20, 2020 at 11:32 pm

High tech corporations want more nearby housing for their current and planned workforce. SB 50 dangles the prospect of some housing "affordable" to others but guarantees no such housing. It would extend high-density to "jobs rich" areas. That woukd be most single-family neighborhoods in the Bay Area counties abutting the Bay. Tell the giant corporations WHERE TO GO: to areas with space and a plan for adjacent housing. High tech workers could then walk to their jobs. See LIVABLE CALIFORNIA for more info. SB 50 is about to be rubber-stamped by the state senate.


1 person likes this
Posted by Christina Nystrom Mantha
a resident of Walnut Grove Elementary School
on Jan 21, 2020 at 6:45 am

Do you support local businesses? Do you shop local? Do you think the City should do the same? If you do, consider attending tonight's City Council meeting.

Two years ago I approached City staff asking for a local preference policy to be adopted - whereby all things being equal, we go local for City business. This is what the Council will be discussing, and hopefully voting on, tonight. To take it a bit further, a "preference percentage" will hopefully be applied to Pleasanton-based businesses for the purpose of bid selection - meaning Pleasanton-based businesses get a slight financial advantage. This is great news! This is better than proclamations and words - this is action!

Reasons why a local preference policy makes sense for Pleasanton:

- In line with our "community of character" ethics - support your neighbors
- Keeps more sales tax dollars in Pleasanton, which provides for parks/community services, infrastructure/roads, and public safety
- Local businesses support our schools and nonprofit organizations
- Local businesses employ local workers
- Dollars spent at Pleasanton-based businesses turn over in Pleasanton - businesses use other Pleasanton businesses that employ other Pleasanton residents, and it goes on
- Set's the "tone at the top" which businesses, PUSD, and other local organizations will hopefully follow
- It is not enough to "say" we support local businesses - if we want them to stay in business we have to commit to them

The meeting is at 7pm. The agenda is linked below.

Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by David
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Jan 22, 2020 at 1:10 am

Tech companies want the profits without mitigating their impacts on area-wide housing supply and traffic increases. Yet government still puts all big fees on residential builders which drive up prices due to a limited supply within proximity to employment hubs. Now government wants to address the housing crisis by building really dense high-rise housing to make up for all the years NIMBYS fought every low and medium density housing projects. We need a paradigm shift of thinking.


2 people like this
Posted by John.B
a resident of Happy Valley
on Jan 28, 2020 at 8:53 am

In my view, housing was being neglected by cities around bay area for last two decades or so, and never aligned to job growth. Cities need of money gave their permission to expand companies left and right, thinking neighboring city picks up the housing tab. Problem is every city thought the same, and their cities played appeasing politics, and their hands tied off to address the issue. Housing issue spiraled up and taken over by Sacramento, in a rightful way. Either you fix it or I will fix it for you. In fact SB50 gives two years for cities to come up with the plan, which is more than adequate. I believe it's a fair game. I see happy valley and areas near by, there are lots which are very big and can easily accommodate more housing density. Cities have the option to distribute the density as they deem fit. Do we need higher density near transit or distribute in a fair way. We need to make the call...hopefully there will be more discussion.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Get the most important local news stories sent straight to your inbox daily.

Premarital and Couples: See "Buck" for Couple's Tips
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,427 views

Mass vote-by-mail invitation to problems
By Tim Hunt | 5 comments | 1,321 views