By Kate Callen / July 28, 2025
This Thursday, July 31, YIMBY Democrats of San Diego are holding a “Summer Soiree” fundraiser at 6:30 p.m. at the Town and Country Resort. YIMBY politicians like Congressman Scott Peters and Assemblymember Chris Ward will be there, along with developers, lobbyists, law firms, and … representatives of Airbnb.
The event flyer gives a big shout-out to the vacation rental conglomerate: “We would like to extend a special thank you to Airbnb, our presenting sponsor this year.”
Come again? Why would a local group dedicated to boosting the housing supply embrace a global conglomerate that shrinks that supply by converting residential units into vacation units?
Airbnb may rightly believe that more housing production will deliver more opportunities for future vacation rentals. And YIMBYs are understandably happy to take the corporate money.
The short-term rental behemoth has been courting density advocates since at least January 2024, when it launched the Airbnb Housing Council. Like its new YIMBY allies, Airbnb expressed concern about the shortage of affordable housing.
“Experts agree the chronic, decades-long underproduction of new housing supply is driving today’s housing affordability challenges,” said the launch press release. “We want to play a role in finding sensible, long-term solutions to help increase the housing supply and work with cities to balance the benefits of home sharing with communities’ needs.”
But the much-trumpeted notion that more housing generates cheaper housing is simply false. In “The Case Against YIMBYism,” New Republic writer Michael Friedrich reports, “A decade since the YIMBY movement launched, there’s little serious evidence that its policies are the magic supply-increasing bullet that proponents claim, nor that they meaningfully decrease rents for working families.”
Citing an Urban Institute study of national land reform measures, Friedrich writes, “During the three to nine years after a city enacts upzoning and other density-increasing measures, new housing supply increases by less than 1 percent. That increase occurs primarily at the high end of the market, and there’s little evidence that new supply frees up additional low-cost units or makes them cheaper.”
San Diego is a desirable place to live, and it is a global vacation destination spot. Market demand will always push housing prices higher. And visitor demand will always incentivize property owners to charge costly per-night lodging rates.
According to analytics by Chalet, a platform for short-term rental owners, San Diego had 14,351 active short-term rentals in June 2025. (The average daily rate was $589.)
How can a city with a severe housing crisis accept the permanent displacement of so many units? How can YIMBYs form an alliance with the industry that caused that displacement?
In “Airbnb, YIMBYs, and the Pro-Housing, Anti-Human Movement” published on the Medium subscription platform, low-impact housing advocate David Friedlander reports that Airbnb has given more than $1.4 million to national and local housing density groups since 2022.
Friedlander believes Airbnb and the YIMBYs are all about saturation development. “[They] seem to think there should be enough housing for everyday people, enough housing for Airbnb units, enough housing for empty warehoused luxury units, and so forth. Whatever the question, the answer is more.”
He concludes, “Airbnb advocating for more housing to drive affordability is like Raytheon advocating for more weapons to drive world peace.”
Friedrich believes the only viable solution to the affordable housing crisis will come from the public sector and not from private developers. “It’s clear that governments are capable of building large public projects quickly when the incentives are right,” he writes. “Think of the postwar public housing boom or construction for the Olympics.”
He concludes with a challenge for YIMBYs: “For those who care about fixing America’s housing crisis, their energies would be better spent on the fight to provide homes as a public good, a change that would truly afflict the comfortable arrangements between politicians and real estate operators that stand in the way of lasting housing justice.”
Thanks very much as always for your reporting on these important issues. It’s especially helpful that you expanded on the news that the YIMBY Dems of San Diego have accepted a large sponsorship from Airbnb, whose corporate interests are contrary and inimitable to our city’s effort to promote more affordable housing.
1. It’s bad that the Yimby Dems are taking money from AirBnB
2. The idea that “the much-trumpeted notion that more housing generates cheaper housing is simply false” is… simply false. A recent roundup of academic studies done over the last four years show “at least six working papers have been released that examine the connections between market-rate housing production and affordability at the neighborhood level. Four of the papers conclude that market-rate development makes nearby housing more, not less, affordable. The fifth paper looks at rents across entire cities rather than at the neighborhood level, but finds that new development causes rents to fall for units across the income distribution. Findings in the sixth paper are mixed, and offer some reason to think new development makes nearby housing more expensive. Although the papers await peer review, and readers should bear that in mind, the importance and near-unanimity of their findings makes discussing them worthwhile.” https://www.lewis.ucla.edu/research/market-rate-development-impacts/ I have more links that I can provide that show how blatantly incorrect Kate’s assertion here is and point out that this website has never once published a study that proves building less keeps home prices down. Happy to be proven wrong (but I won’t be).
3. We also have evidence on the ground here that more homes in specific locations in San Diego have made an impact. Per KPBS “Rents are rising everywhere in San Diego County, but data shows rents rise more slowly in ZIP codes with more permitted homes. The average rent in San Diego County rose 52% between 2018 and the first four months of 2025, according to data from Zillow, rising from $2,071.67 to $3,161.94. But rents grew the slowest in the ZIP codes that permitted the most homes. In the ZIP codes that permitted the fewest homes, rents skyrocketed.”
4. “San Diego is a desirable place to live, and it is a global vacation destination spot. Market demand will always push housing prices higher.” Is that what it is? Or is it because we stopped building homes over the last 15 years and the median year houses were built in this county was 1979? Nearly 500K homes were built from 1970 – 1990. From 2010 to today we’ve built… 89K.
5. Why were all of you able to afford homes but your kids can’t? Was it not a desirable place to live when boomers bought but is now?
Housing prices and rents in the most desirable coastal neighborhoods in San Diego will (sadly) continue to increase, until over densification and lack of parking due to the City’s insane ADU policies makes these neighborhoods less desirable places to live. So let’s just turn San Diego into a sh*thole, where people don’t want to live, and housing will become more affordable. Have you ever checked up housing prices in Red Mountain? (you know, that high desert meth lab sh*thole on the 395 on the way to Mammoth)
Market manipulation is what keeps pushing prices higher. Legally unmitigated Real Estate Corps have usurped nearly 40% of single family homes for sale in this county since the repeal of Glass Steagal in 1998. Simultaneously mindless rubber-stamping has been flooding the market tens of thousands of deliberately overpriced luxury apartments projects that, by design, continue to manipulate rents without home sales to families to temper rental costs as they have done historically in the land of plenty. A windfall for corporate landlords and political slush fund palm greasing.
It is the Politico-Corporate Monopolization of Housing brought to you Gavin Newsom and made possible by Todd Gloria written legislation in the Assembly that has fostered the assault on San Diegans and Californians. That is responsible for the 300% rent increases since 1998.
Why would you cite 6 white papers, without linking any of them to back your ridiculous claim? Are these peer reviewed studies ? Why not furnish the links?
You only linked to one very contrived UCLA “Study” from February of 2021 (this is not a peer reviewed white paper as you have implied).
Can you say conflict of interest?
We should remind you that UC Regents Board elected to invest pension monies valued at $4 Billion into Blackstone, the largest publicly traded investment/developer/and corporate landlord on Wall Street.
Quoting KPBS? KPBS is walking-talking-broadcasting conflict of interest. Considering that KPBS has almost been wholly dependent on developer $$$ and regularly run ADU commercials on PUBLIC television to stay afloat they are not the purveyor of truth and justice they once were.
The KPBS Roundtable, Andrew Keats has shown nothing but developer deference and sadly the KPBS politico-corporate real estate complex fealty is palpable. Gotta keep that hyper-gentrification money rolling in to public broadcasting…
Save_SFZ, name one renter, just one, that can confirm your claim that after the construction of high density apartments their neighborhood furnish proof of a rent decrease. Just one, show us just one instance to prove your point, please.
It is satisfying now that the Rag readers are seeing for themselves how desperate YIMBY’s are to keep falsely manipulating the dialogue. We know our eyes are not deceiving us.
Public awareness is growing exponentially by the hour…
“Your day cometh, and none to soon.”
My apologies, I had intended to write Andrew Bowen.
For the record though, I can’t stand Andrew Keats either.
Nailed it!
To Save_SFZ_1, please know that the OB Rag is pro housing. Most of us here and at our community organizations such as Neighbors for a better San Diego & California, and the community coalition know that we need to build more homes, no one is doubting that building more homes lowers rent.
What we don’t like is how building more homes is going to ruin our communities. Single family homes are ingrained in our culture, and lifestyle. I’m an old timer, and they are all I have known. You will learn later on that it is frightening to see changes, some change is necessary but it is our basic human will to want to keep the status quo. Call it NIMBYISM but what it really is is being human, we are naturally guided when we are made by God to want to preserve what we have.
What we truly want too is housing that doesn’t ruin our single family neighborhoods, downtown is the place to build housing, not Golden Hill. There is plenty of open land in San Diego, we can just build further too. I and the thousands of reader believe in building more housing will reduce rents, it’s just it should not be in our single family neighborhoods which is what makes us and our country unique, and one of the greatest in the world.
More housing DOES NOT equate to more affordable housing nor to lower rents, etc. San Diego does not have a housing crisis; it has an affordable housing crisis. Just peruse the Sunday UT as I did yesterday and you’ll see plenty of housing available; it’s just not affordable.
One final thing the Urban Institute’s closing paragraph from the study Kate linked to above finds “Cities should consider pairing direct investments in housing subsidies—such as immediate investments in housing vouchers and project-based subsidies for publicly assisted housing—with reforms loosening restrictions to address both short-term and long-term housing affordability.” Long term housing affordability depends on allowing more housing which this website is diametrically opposed to, gotta read the whole study sometimes before you link to it thinking you’ve owned someone!
Just to clarify, “Long term housing affordability depends on allowing more housing ” is not true. See my other comment: More housing DOES NOT equate to more affordable housing nor to lower rents, etc. San Diego does not have a housing crisis; it has an affordable housing crisis. Just peruse the Sunday UT as I did yesterday and you’ll see plenty of housing available; it’s just not affordable.
You sound like a sorry sack. Frank has done more for this city than you will ever accomplish, kook.
The Ralph & Goldy Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies at UCLA is funded by a major property developer. While the group often lobbies for progressive causes, there appear to be financial interests working in the background, ensuring particular views are espoused, and people who hold those views are hired.
That’s like anti vaxxers saying vaccine studies proving vaccines are safe and effective are false because they were funded by pharmaceuticals.
Once again, you no provided links to your 5 studies George PB. Personal attacks expose the weakness of the basis of your arguement, in this case the complete absence of any substantive arguement required for any debate. “I know you are but what am I?” is not a legitimate defense of your opinions.
BTW The Politico-Corporate Real Estate Complex profiting from the Corporate Monopolization of Housing is the only Cult coopting politicians. We are the People.
All of the representatives that attend this event are twisted in the head and, butt kissers and in it for political donations and/or jobs when they leave office or ???
Not voting for ANY of them again and that goes for some that might run for governor.
Good article by Andrew Bowen:
https://www.kpbs.org/news/quality-of-life/2025/07/28/san-diego-housing-data-reveal-fastest-growth-in-urban-core
Though it doesn’t address the Air BnB issue.
Conveniently your KPBS article doesn’t address the AirB&B problem, by design. And why would it? After all Air B&B hosted corruptable lawmakers at the Town and Country Hotel on the day this article came out. Ironic? Hardly.
Suppression is propaganda.
Andrew Bowen is a unrepentant YIMBY and very dishonest “journalist.” The Rag and our writers have repeatedly called him out on his BS. I’m sorry you find him so fascinating.
Here are examples from that very article: “The city has also changed its parking requirements and adopted programs that allow more density and taller buildings in exchange for affordable housing.” He’s referencing Complete Communities and the Bonus ADU program, which the City Council just had to step in and reform; these programs cut out requirements for parking and have allowed up to 17 ADUs in the backyard of a single-family residence, with no set-backs, with no new infrastructure. Studies have shown that this ADU BS is not providing more affordable housing.
Here is another example: “Accessory dwelling units, which can be built in the backyard of a single-family home, made up about 16% of all housing permits. However, ADUs are the only type of housing that San Diego builds in significant numbers within single-family neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods still make up the vast majority of the city’s residential land.” Not a word, or hint or clue about how San Diego’s / Gloria’s ADU extremism have disrupted neighborhoods.
Chris, do you recall our “Worst ADU Contest” we had a year or so ago? Did any of it sink in? Are you familiar with the Turquoise Tower that the developer wants to build in PB — 23 stories? And now there’s the 17-story tower a developer wants to build on Columbia Street in Middletown. All due to Complete Communities; and not a whiff from Bowen. This is dishonest reporting.
Here in North Park, when my sister and I searched for an apartment for a relative, we visited a half-dozen recently built mid-rise complexes. The typical unit was 700-750 SF for a monthly rent of $2,600-plus. We saw nothing bigger and nothing cheaper. Complete Communities has allowed more housing in North Park. Almost none of it is affordable (or suitable for families, but that’s another story). How many years must we wait for those rents to come down? Where can working people live in the meantime?
Why do you think housing got so expensive over the last 15 years Kate? Maybe we only built 89K homes since 2010 when we built 500K between 1970 and 1990? How much has your house appreciated because of this scarcity?
Almost all housing is built by private developers. They will charge as much as they can, especially in a desirable market like San Diego.. That’s how capitalism works. There was more land available between 1970 and 1990. Now available land is hard to find. And yes, my house has appreciated in value. But I have no desire to sell it and move, so what good does it do me?
This article helps explain why Sacramento passed legislation that limits to $100 the amount an HOA can charge for a rule violation. This small amount will incentivise owners to violate CC&R regulations and rent short term for an extra $100 service fee. So my building with a 30 day minimum rental rule, that creates long term housing opportunities, will become a vacation resort, taking affordable housing off the market. Nice going Sacramento Yimbys in cahoots with AirBNB.
When Palm Springs capped AirBNB rentals in 2022, local housing prices and rents went down. San Diego should run a pilot by temporarily outlawing short term vacation rentals and see if the same results happen here.
I just read an article on the CEO of AirBnB, a 43-year-old billionaire, and his complete devotion to his company. Perhaps he sees all these ADUs and especially JADUs as potential AirBnB’s, and therefore supports them, particularly in desirable neighborhoods. With a net worth of $9.2 Billion according to Forbes, he can afford to play the long game.