San Francisco: proposed Affordable Housing. (Photo: HUD.gov)
Gov. Newsom Signs Sen Wiener’s SB 79 to ‘San Francisco’ all of California
This is forced density without local input and control
By Katy Grimes, October 13, 2025 2:55 am
California Governor Gavin Newsom just signed Senate Bill 79 by Democrat State Senator Scott Wiener of San Francisco, to force single-family neighborhoods to accept high-rise apartment buildings, overriding local zoning restrictions which ban dense development to favor “transit-oriented housing development.”
Here is Governor Newsom’s juvenile response:
HUGE NEWS!! YIMBY’S REJOICE !! California is making historic strides today as @CAGovernor Gavin Newsom signs #SB79 — streamlining the building of more housing all across the Golden State. No, it does not supersede local control as some have falsely claimed. No, it is not one-size fits all. And no, this is not some “land-grab” by the state. This action sets the state up for success in addressing the affordability and building crisis happening right now!
HUGE NEWS!! YIMBY’S REJOICE !!
California is making historic strides today as @CAGovernor Gavin Newsom signs #SB79 — streamlining the building of more housing all across the Golden State.
No, it does not supersede local control as some have falsely claimed. No, it is not…
— Governor Newsom Press Office (@GovPressOffice) October 10, 2025
It’s all about the YIMBY’s – the “Yes in my backyard” outfit operating in nearly every California city as a non-profit.
Here is what YIMBY says it stand for:
- addressing and correcting systemic inequities in California housing laws, and in related laws and regulations;
- empowering Californians across the state to engage their elected representatives at the state and local levels on housing and related policies;
- ensuring that California housing laws and local regulations are evidence-based, equitable and inclusive; and
- drafting and advocating for proven legislative solutions that accelerate the pace of home building.
Building back better, faster, and more sustainably
More homes near transit
Renewing the dream of homeownership
But YIMBY and Sen. Wiener actually dream of destroying California suburbs, because suburbs are where people flee from the cities, from apartment living, from crappy schools, from living on top of each other in dense housing.
Take note that in August, the Los Angeles City Council voted 8-5 to oppose SB 79, calling it a “Sacramento attempt to hijack local planning,” silencing residents, Palisades News reported. Los Angeles and Pacific Palisades are right.
As many who have followed the long path of SB 70 have concluded, all of the six-story apartment buildings built next to a single family home will probably be luxury housing, no matter what is said by Sen. Wiener and Gov. Newsom. Developers can’t afford to build subsidized “affordable housing” in established residential neighborhoods.
Wiener’s latest housing bill “requires a housing development project within a specified radius of existing or currently proposed major transit-oriented development (TOD) stop, be an allowable use on a site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development, if the housing development meets certain requirements. This bill also allows a transit agency to adopt TOD zoning standards for district-owned land located in a TOD zone.”
To understand why California has a housing shortage, you merely need to look at Existing law which:
1) Requires, pursuant to State Density Bonus Law (DBL), each city and county to adopt an ordinance that specifies how it will implement DBL. Requires cities and counties to grant a density bonus when an applicant for a housing development of five or more units seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at least one of the following:
a) 10% of the total units of a housing development for lower-income (LI) households;
b) 5% of the total units of a housing development for very low-income (VLI) households;
c) A senior citizen housing development or mobile home park;
d) 10% of the units in a common interest development (CID) for moderate- income households;
e) 10% of the total units for transitional foster youth, veterans, or people experiencing homelessness; or
f) 20% of the total units for lower-income students in a student housing development.
g) 100% of the units of a housing development for lower-income households, except that 20% of units may be for moderate-income households.
Sponsoring SB 79, are Bay Area Council, California Yimby, Greenbelt Alliance, Spur (San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association), Streets for All, mostly San Francisco Bay Area centric.
California needs more housing, but destroying long established urban and suburban neighborhoods with density housing is not the way to do it. Politicians need to strip away their own building and permitting regulations in order to get actual “affordable” housing built.
Sen. Wiener supports “upzoning land,” which makes it easier for cities to “upzone” from single-family zoning, to allowing for multiple unit buildings. This is not without controversy, and is supply-side progressivism. Leftists say aloud “low and moderate income families deserve to live in high-opportunity neighborhoods. It’s wrong to restrict them to communities where the affluent do not want to live.” This is “housing and environmental justice.”
This bill is solely about state control over local development and growth, because of a “housing crisis” created by the brain trust at the state: Never ending regulations, CEQA abuse, and “mitigation fees,” which are just additional taxes. And this is about destroying “high-opportunity neighborhoods” in which people sacrificed, scrimped and saved to be able to move to.
San Diego Supervisor Jim Desmond warned earlier this year, “Now, instead of fixing their mistakes, the politicians want to take it out on local communities. This is not smart growth — it’s forced density without local input and control. And it turns the very idea of property rights upside down.”
Desmond added, “We need to stop SB 79 before it turns every neighborhood in California into a political experiment.”
Earlier this month we asked, “Is this why Gov. Gavin Newsom will likely sign the bill?”
This why Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill.
A California native and Navy mom, Katy lives in Sacramento, CA.
- Hypocrite Alert: Gov. Newsom Blames Trump For Abandoning LA Fire Survivors - December 5, 2025
- Gov Newsom ‘Bends the Knee’ to Trump After Maligning President at NYT Event - December 4, 2025
- Trump Administration to Withhold SNAP Funds From Democrat States - December 3, 2025
RELATED ARTICLES
-
-
-
September 15, 2021
Why don’t they start with places like Beverly Hills or Brentwood? That’ll show those rich, oppressive leaches on the proletariat a thing or two. That might be called something like “Doug Emhoff’s nanny’s payback,” or revenge for general monied nonsense like marking the level of milk on the carton so the maid won’t be drinking any. Weiner should be putting his “justice impacted” social projects where his mouth is and see if his face doesn’t get bitten off.
I cringe to think where Wiener’s mouth is – or has been.
I don’t have anything against Beverly Hills, Brentwood, or any such place. People should be able to live any way and any where they aspire and can afford to live in a free country. But by Newsom’s and Wiener’s own measures and desires it seems only reasonable that MARIN COUNTY, where Gruesome “owns” a $9.1 million mansion, with multiple BRs and baths, pool, tennis court, bath house, guest house, and only God knows what else on multl-acres, as well as all of his privileged and protected friends there, should be seeing a goodly amount of state-mandated stack-and-pack infill, to the letter, in response to Newsom & Wiener’s precious exalted SB 79. After all, as TJ pointed out not that long ago, as I recall, Marin County has major transit hubs that would qualify it.
But this area of Marin County has been EXEMPTED from such blight, until the year 2028, mind you (which by the way will be extended when we hit 2028, count on it), and it was all arranged some years ago by Newsom HIMSELF and his fine hand and oversight when he was Lt. Gov some years ago.
What’s more this a-hole governor of ours has had the nerve meanwhile, with that Marin County exemption in place, to sue places like Huntington Beach, with A.G. Rob Bonta acting as his henchman and personal servant, for not taking a collective knee in response to Newsom’s “orders” for Huntington Beach to comply with so-called “affordable housing” infill mandates, when the city is built-out already, never mind that it’s none of the state’s business in the first place.
P.S. Remember, this is all about MONEY to fill Newsom’s and Wiener’s campaign coffers with developer donor money as they pursue their raggedy and undeserved agenda for higher office. Where they hope to ruin us further.
You missed the point. As a working man who’s been on jobs to places like Beverly Hills, Bel Air, Westwood and the like, those people don’t want regular, gainfully employed people anywhere around their community – unless it concerns directly hired labor for some reason to do with individidual residences. Think of the collective involuntary bowl movement those exclusive communities would suffer if Wiener forced a load of multi generational food stamp, MediCal, tatted up, “justice involved,” drinking liquor and doing drugs on the front porch neighbors in those communities. Wiener would not only have his political face bitten off, but his ass would also be torn to shreds by people who have the eff-you money to make it happen. Two income suburban families have enough trouble owning two sets of bed sheets after paying the mortgage to be of any threat of inflicting payback on Wiener for jacking up their neighborhoods.
Leftists say aloud “low and moderate income families deserve to live in high-opportunity neighborhoods. It’s wrong to restrict them to communities where the affluent do not want to live.” This is “housing and environmental justice.”
This was already tried and failed in the 1970’s in Oakland when the Oakland Housing Athority built hundreds of devolopments all over East Oakland and led to the mass flight of the middle class families that lived there to the suburbs leaving the mess that still exists. Deja-Vue all over again. Some people never learn
@Fed Up in NORCAL, Good point! People don’t want to live around squalor, drug abuse, crime, vandalism.
This is straight out of UN Agenda 21, the concept of bunching and stacking everyone together. Why? It’s easier to control them if they’re all in one spot.
To Dan de la Torre: Agree completely. The provisions of SB79 are an affront to our freedom to live in the very types of homes, neighborhoods, and communities we desire. Single-family housing, local government control, and the notions of independence, privacy, autonomy are jeopardized by this horrible law. Senator Scott Wiener – the author of some extremely bad legislation – has outdone himself this time. Until he’s shunned by decent people, and voted permanently out of office, we will continue to pay the price of his depravity.
Little boxes on the hillside
Little boxes made of ticky-tacky
Little boxes on the hillside
Little boxes all the same . . .
Malvina Reynolds/Pete Seeger (1963)
Yes! ….tiny little boxes🎶…..
BTW, @Dan De La Torre is spot on! It comes form Agenda 21. Many may have heard of 15 minute cities. It is to restrict movement not enhance!
Cali Girl, my mom called these stack and pack residences “rabbit warrens.”
In my county most of the new rabbit warrens have zero parking spaces. But at least the residents can walk to their jobs. Oh, wait . . .
Your Mom sounds awesome, “rabbit warrens” is a great descriptor. Think about it, you don’t even have to leave your hutch to eat, it will be delivered to you!😳
I think the Covid lockdowns were the conditioning tool to get people use to staying inside their tiny “rabbit warrens”.
Yes, same just enough space for a tiny ev smart car or electric scooter! And sorry not sorry your guests have to park in the neighborhood behind you that actually have yards and unrestricted street parking, if you are so lucky to live near an old school suburban neighborhood! 😣
You do know Seeger was devoted to Stalin, right?
Katy Grimes is right, if Democrats wanted actual affordable housing to be built then they’d strip away their onerous building and permitting regulations like CEQA and mitigation fees. Of course Democrats will never do that and creepy Democrat Sen. Scott Wiener’s bill is all having about more Democrat control over local development and growth while destroying established neighborhoods with up-zoning under the guise of creating more housing. Democrats are demonically evil.
TJ please see my comment above. Can you confirm what I said you pointed out a while ago about transit hubs in Marin County that qualify it for SB 79 stack and pack infill? My memory is foggy
One of the first neighborhoods that should be up-zoned with low-income high-rise apartment buildings is the wealthy community of Kentfield in bucolic Marin County where the Newsom’s live in a multi-million dollar mansion. Kentfield meets the criteria for SB 79 and it’s ripe for up-zoning because Marin Transit operates Routes 22 and 228 in Kentfield that connects to the nearby College of Marin campus which acts as a transit hub.
Kentfield is one of the wealthiest cities in California with an average annual income of $356K and the median home price exceeds $2.1 million. Kentfield’s white population is among the highest in California with 84% of residents identifying as white. Kentfield is overwhelmingly Democratic in its political leanings, with voter registration statistics showing that 62% of registered voters identify as Democrats.
The Newsom’s and their wealthy white Democrat neighbors in Kentfield should embrace and welcome all the diversity that low-income high-rise apartment buildings will bring to their Kentfield neighborhood! We can only dream about that ever happening?
Never mind TJ, ha ha. We simultaneously posted and you provided what I was asking for. excellent.
Great stuff as usual.
👍
Good point. “For thee and me”.
One way out of this might be a citizen-backed initiative to repeal it.
I noticed Gregory Brittain mentioned it in a comment on the earlier SB 79 Katy Grimes article and I’ve heard it mentioned elsewhere too, where it was noted that citizen groups might already be organizing to put a repeal on the ballot as we speak. we’ll see, but that potential relief is something to keep in mind.
SB79 the pack ’em in like sardines civilization
Its about more control over the people where crime is rampant, so they live in fear to be a controlled populace seeking gov’t as savior.
We are reliving Fall of Rome
Yes, Orwellianism:
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”
H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)
“housing and environmental justice”
Anytime you see “justice” added to terms like racial, environmental, housing, etc., it is code for “Communism”.
“Renewing the dream of homeownership”
Most people dream of a middle class single family home with a backyard to raise their kids, not some cramped smelly, noisy apartment that’s like living in a jail cell. If you have 15%+ of the people who are low income, you will be living around people who have been or should be in a jail cell. That’s not safe.
Yes, most people still have that dream and the number one reason the younger generation are moving out of California to Texas, Florida, Tennessee….
You can have a single family house. You may have to see something slightly denser from your single family house.
If you think it is bad now, you better hope Prop. 50 doesn’t pass.
Gruscum and Weiner are queer
“Addressing and correcting systemic inequities in California housing laws, and in related laws and regulations” translates to *Removing property rights from property owners*
You can have a single family house. You may have to see something slightly denser from your single family house.
You have property rights over YOUR property. You may actually get MORE rights to use your property in different ways.
These boxes ain’t little. They’re massive structures. That song was about the siburb of Daly City…the type of suburb Newsom wants to destroy.