Category: Civil Rights

New controversial law mandates dense housing near transit, overriding local zoning to address California’s housing crisis

By Steve Puterski / Substack / October 11, 2025

In a sweeping move to reshape housing near transit, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 79 on Friday, October 10, triggering major zoning changes and fierce backlash from cities across the state.

The bill, authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), expands Transit-Oriented Districts (TODs) to every transit station and bus stop. The bill requires cities and counties to upzone land with significant density requirements, such as a minimum of five to six stories (55 to 65 feet), a minimum density of 80 to 120 units per acre (depending on the tier), prevailing wages, strict labor requirements and more.

In the fall of 1964, over 60 years ago, the young students on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley found themselves in an untenable situation. Campus activists had set up information tables in Sproul Plaza on campus and had solicited donations for causes connected to the Civil Rights Movement. Some of them had traveled with the Freedom Riders and had worked to register African American voters in Mississippi that previous summer.  At the time, however, existing rules for fundraising for political parties was limited exclusively to the Democratic and Republican school clubs.

In mid-September, a school dean announced that existing University regulations prohibiting advocacy of political causes or candidates, outside political speakers, recruitment and fundraising by student organizations would be “strictly enforced.” Two weeks later, a graduate student sitting at one of the civil rights tables refused to show his identification to campus police and was immediately arrested and placed inside a campus police car on Sproul.

Suddenly and spontaneously hundreds of students who witnessed the arrest, surrounded the police car, sat down and refused to budge. While the graduate student sat in the backseat, student activist leaders mounted the car and began to give speeches on free speech and against political restrictions. Students remained around the car for 32 hours and at one point, there were an estimated 3,000 students blocking its movement. People used the car as a speaker’s podium and held a continuous public discussion on rights, free speech and student liberties. This continued until charges against the graduate student were dropped.

It was the first mass act of civil disobedience on an American college campus in the 1960s and was the birth of the Free Speech Movement.

By Geoff Page

On August 29, 2024, the people of OB came away with a rare victory, winning an appeal before the Planning Commission. The appeal involved a proposed, ridiculously dense, project on the southwest corner of Ebers Street and Point Loma Ave.

Because there appeared to be a legal conflict between the Complete Communities plan and the Municipal Code, the commissioners approved the appeal. However, here is what Vice Chair Matthew Boomhower, who was chairing the meeting, had to say in his closing remarks:

(to city staff) I hope you take this as an opportunity to change the Municipal code. I think it is a great project. Normally, I and the rest of this commission would have wholeheartedly supported it and denied the appeal.

There is clearly a world of difference between the people sitting on that commission and the rest of us.

Now, it appears that effort to “fix” this problem for the city is upon us. Here is the proposed change to the Land Development Code that would “fix” this for the city.

It Will Never Work

By Michael Barnes / 48 Hills (San Francisco) / September 22, 2025
 
State Sen. Scott Wiener’s latest upzoning bill, Senate Bill 79, is bizarrely incompetent. The bill upzones huge areas around BART, Muni and other rail transit stops in a way that is impractical. In the coming decades, there will not be enough population growth to come close to filling these new transit-oriented development zones.

The bill is a good example of how we face the confluence of powerful landowners, sympathetic pro-growth newspapers publishers, and sycophantic legislators. SB 79 is billed as a measure to help keep public transit solvent, but in reality, it’s a land grab.

The bill only applies to seven counties in California, the four Bay Area counties of San Francisco, Alameda, San Mateo and Santa Clara, plus Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento. Three Bay Area counties, Contra Costa, Sonoma and Marin, were carved out of the bill by an added requirement that a county contain more than 15 rail transit stops. Orange County will most likely be included once it finishes its streetcar plan. These eight counties contain 59 percent of the state population.

By Danna Givot

The College Area community showed up in force on October 9 to support the 7 Visions Plan the community has worked on since 2016. But, despite the factual arguments raised by all presenters, six Planning Commissioners voted unanimously to support the City’s 2 nd Draft College Area Community Plan Update without recommending any amendments. Arguments regarding excessive density, lack of supportive infrastructure, fire safety concerns, inequity, and violation of affirmatively further fair housing goals fell on deaf ears.

People came from across San Diego (including from Encanto, Jamacha, Linda Vista, Clairemont, Kensington, Talmadge, Uptown, Pacific Beach, North Park, and
Scripps Ranch) to support the College Area and cede time to speakers opposing the City’s proposed 2nd Draft College Area Community Plan Update. Nate Wilson, an
SDSU student, even called in to oppose the City’s proposed plan.

Backing up the presentations opposing the City’s massive upzoning of the College Area were official letters from the College Area Community Planning Board, the College Area Community Council, the San Diego Community Planners Committee and the San Diego Parks and Recreation Board. The primary concerns raised by
all included the excessive upzoning versus other recent community plans that is unaccompanied by realistic commitments for supportive infrastructure, especially parks and fire protection.

The College Area is essentially a “park desert” with only one existing public 1.6 acre park that is only partially usable (part is a drainage swale). It has no playground or dog park. There is no recreation center in this community. The only public building is the library, which has only 28 dedicated parking spaces when it should have 80. (This was the only point the Commissioners were sympathetic to.)

The leaders of the U.S. military may soon face a terrible decision.

By Tom Nichols / The Atlantic – Reader Supported News / October 8, 2025

To capture a democratic nation, authoritarians must control three sources of power: the intelligence agencies, the justice system, and the military. President Donald Trump and his circle of would-be autocrats have made rapid progress toward seizing these institutions and detaching them from the Constitution and rule of law. The intelligence community has effectively been muzzled, and the nation’s top lawyers and cops are being purged and replaced with loyalist hacks.

[Please go to original for important links.]

Only the military remains outside Trump’s grip. Despite the firing of several top officers—and Trump’s threat to fire more—the U.S. armed forces are still led by generals and admirals whose oath is to the Constitution, not the commander in chief. But for how long?

Trump and his valet at the Defense Department, Secretary of Physical Training Pete Hegseth, are now making a dedicated run at turning the men and women of the armed forces into Trump’s personal and partisan army. In his first term, Trump regularly violated the sacred American tradition of the military’s political neutrality, but people around him—including retired and active-duty generals such as James Mattis, John Kelly, and Mark Milley—restrained some of his worst impulses. Now no one is left to stop him:

By Jack Flemming and David Zahniser / Los Angeles Times / Oct. 3, 2025

• Senate Bill 79 would override local zoning, allowing developers to build up to nine-story residential buildings alongside transit stops.
• Homeowners, tenant advocates and others are scrambling to understand the sweeping legislation.
• Carve-outs and complex exemptions have made it difficult for residents to determine which properties would ultimately be affected.

When Brendon Gerisch and his wife searched for a new home, they knew they wanted something with a little privacy — a backyard, some fully grown trees, less crowded surroundings.The couple thought they found their “forever home” in L.A.’s Westchester neighborhood, buying a four-bedroom in 2018 on a quiet street with one-story houses.

Now, he’s not so sure. Landmark legislation now on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk would “upzone” his and scores of other neighborhoods across California, allowing the construction of residential buildings as tall as nine stories, depending on how close they are to a rail station.

State Senate Bill 79, one of the most significant pieces of housing legislation in decades, seeks to address California’s housing crisis by boosting production near public transit stops — mostly rail but also some buses — in Southern California, Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay Area. Newsom has not yet announced whether he will sign the bill.

Overview

What would Proposition 50 change about congressional districts in California?

Ballotpedia reports: California Proposition 50, 2025

[Please see Ballotpedia for any and all links]

Proposition 50 would authorize the state to use a new congressional district map from Assembly Bill 604 (AB 604).[1]

The new congressional district map would be used to elect members of the U.S. House of Representatives from 2026 through 2030. The proposed map would replace the existing maps, which the 14-member Citizens Redistricting Commission adopted on December 27, 2021, for elections from 2022 through 2030. Proposition 50 would provide that the Citizens Redistricting Commission will redraw congressional districts in 2031.[1]

By Erwin Chemerinsky / The Sacramento Bee / September 30, 2025

If there is a path toward authoritarianism for the United States, this is it. The indictment of former FBI Director James Comey is just the latest outrage and effort to use the power of the federal government for the sake of retribution.

As we enter just the ninth month of President Donald Trump’s second term, it is essential to recognize that what we have seen is unprecedented in American history.

Trump, by his words and actions, has governed as if there are no checks on his authority. He quoted French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte on the social media platforms Truth Social and X, writing “He who saves the country violates no law.” At a televised press conference on August 26, the president discussed his use of troops for law enforcement, saying “(I have) the right to anything I want to do. I’m the president of the United States.”

Historic presidential overreach
Trump’s assertions of presidential power are broader than any other president has claimed. No president before has ever claimed that he can fire everyone in the executive branch of government or claimed the ability to eliminate agencies created by federal statute. No president has claimed the authority to massively cut off federal spending appropriated by Congress. (President Richard Nixon impounded funds, but not nearly on this scale).

Black Rages Against Planned Fort Stockton “Monstrosity” Across the Street from Her Property

By Kate Callen

A scorching Facebook post by Democratic powerbroker Laurie Black has been ricocheting around San Diego this past week. Community activists who oppose rampant upzoning have been reading Black’s missive with a sense of astonishment. Here is a transcript:

“I have no words!!! Or maybe I do!!!

“As the developer 2004-2007 of the property across the street from this eyesore, 1Mission, along with my late husband Bob Lawrence of R.S. Lawrence Development, we worked WITH the Mission Hills community to develop a project that received more than 5 awards for DESIGN, SMART GROWTH, HISTORICAL DESIGNATION, etc. 20 years later [it] is still a wonderful example of smart growth and design. Mark Steele designed a stunning project!

By Danna Givot

The City is planning to increase the College Area’s zoning to allow 34,150 (2050) versus 8200 housing units on the ground in 2024 – a 316% increase. That’s crazy when SANDAG estimates the entire city of San Diego will increase housing by 107,778 units between 2023 and 2050.

Why should the College Area be upzoned to provide almost one quarter of the City’s new housing between now and 2050? It shouldn’t!

In 2020, the College Area housed only 1.8% of the City’s people and accounted for less than 1% of San Diego’s acreage, so why would it be upzoned to accommodate 24% of the new housing in San Diego. It makes no sense.

Let’s look at what other recent community plan updates have upzoned their community planning areas for and compare them to what is being asked of the College Area.

Mira Mesa, University, Hillcrest/Uptown and Clairemont have three or more times the existing housing and their community plans are only increasing their housing density by 98% on average, while the College Area is being hammered with a 316% increase. What could justify this?