Upzone the coastal elites
@aboutdave.bsky.social
Patent attorney, astrophysicist, & Stack-and-Packist 🏙️🥑🔋⛷️. Ready to help enforce state housing law.
Followup, while he thinks people should go all out in protesting the city council's pro-housing stance, he's also unwilling to come early.
November 11, 2025 at 3:17 AM
Followup, while he thinks people should go all out in protesting the city council's pro-housing stance, he's also unwilling to come early.
Yeah, the crank candidates are trying to mobilize against a minor revision to landmarkings as if it were a threat to basic human rights.
"Frivolous" is right.
"Frivolous" is right.
November 11, 2025 at 2:58 AM
Yeah, the crank candidates are trying to mobilize against a minor revision to landmarkings as if it were a threat to basic human rights.
"Frivolous" is right.
"Frivolous" is right.
Nextdoor NIMBYs claiming that the Berkeley city council is secretly plotting to end all street fairs on Telegraph because of "safety restrictions regarding building height and street width."
November 8, 2025 at 12:08 AM
Nextdoor NIMBYs claiming that the Berkeley city council is secretly plotting to end all street fairs on Telegraph because of "safety restrictions regarding building height and street width."
Robert Reich moved into the neighborhood because of its.... Checks notes... extremely problematic history of economic segregation.
November 6, 2025 at 6:58 PM
Robert Reich moved into the neighborhood because of its.... Checks notes... extremely problematic history of economic segregation.
Berkeley peeps probably know this, but the NIMBYs are organizing around Corridors upzoning.
November 6, 2025 at 5:12 PM
Berkeley peeps probably know this, but the NIMBYs are organizing around Corridors upzoning.
We "abolished" single family zoning. And basically nothing changed because it was poison pilled to death.
ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and...
ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and...
November 5, 2025 at 7:28 PM
We "abolished" single family zoning. And basically nothing changed because it was poison pilled to death.
ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and...
ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and...
We should not offer FAIR plan coverage on anything like these terms.
We should not be paying essentially public funds to rebuild homes, or pay out equity, for homes that are objectively too dangerous to insure.
Suck for them, and their mortgage, but it's throwing good money after bad risk.
We should not be paying essentially public funds to rebuild homes, or pay out equity, for homes that are objectively too dangerous to insure.
Suck for them, and their mortgage, but it's throwing good money after bad risk.
November 1, 2025 at 8:26 PM
We should not offer FAIR plan coverage on anything like these terms.
We should not be paying essentially public funds to rebuild homes, or pay out equity, for homes that are objectively too dangerous to insure.
Suck for them, and their mortgage, but it's throwing good money after bad risk.
We should not be paying essentially public funds to rebuild homes, or pay out equity, for homes that are objectively too dangerous to insure.
Suck for them, and their mortgage, but it's throwing good money after bad risk.
Clearly I'm a monster :)
October 31, 2025 at 4:31 PM
Clearly I'm a monster :)
Anti-yimbys sure are sensitive about proud support for builders of housing in a housing shortage.
October 31, 2025 at 4:26 PM
Anti-yimbys sure are sensitive about proud support for builders of housing in a housing shortage.
I know who's not funding SF, the longtime homeowners with huge prop. 13 discounts that fight new housing...
October 30, 2025 at 2:10 PM
I know who's not funding SF, the longtime homeowners with huge prop. 13 discounts that fight new housing...
The messaging from @350ccaction.bsky.social is completely broken on housing.
They are laser focused on electrification of existing housing, but effectively opposed to preventing abuse of zoning and CEQA against beneficial infill housing.
Missing the forrest for the trees.
They are laser focused on electrification of existing housing, but effectively opposed to preventing abuse of zoning and CEQA against beneficial infill housing.
Missing the forrest for the trees.
October 29, 2025 at 5:34 PM
The messaging from @350ccaction.bsky.social is completely broken on housing.
They are laser focused on electrification of existing housing, but effectively opposed to preventing abuse of zoning and CEQA against beneficial infill housing.
Missing the forrest for the trees.
They are laser focused on electrification of existing housing, but effectively opposed to preventing abuse of zoning and CEQA against beneficial infill housing.
Missing the forrest for the trees.
LA massively decreased the zoning capacity, now much multifamily housing could be built.
And you think nobody is banning multifamily. Uh huh.
And you think nobody is banning multifamily. Uh huh.
October 28, 2025 at 6:08 PM
LA massively decreased the zoning capacity, now much multifamily housing could be built.
And you think nobody is banning multifamily. Uh huh.
And you think nobody is banning multifamily. Uh huh.
Sure. Otoh, yikes.
October 25, 2025 at 5:50 PM
Sure. Otoh, yikes.
The fire risk and insurance issues would be a big giveaway.
Also scores like these in a city like Berkeley.
Also scores like these in a city like Berkeley.
October 25, 2025 at 2:28 PM
The fire risk and insurance issues would be a big giveaway.
Also scores like these in a city like Berkeley.
Also scores like these in a city like Berkeley.
I appreciate this opinion and have just a few notes.
The line that the builder's remedy would result in "displacements" is dangerously misleading. State law provides robust protections for low income residents in rent controlled housing.
www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/open...
The line that the builder's remedy would result in "displacements" is dangerously misleading. State law provides robust protections for low income residents in rent controlled housing.
www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/open...
October 25, 2025 at 2:23 PM
I appreciate this opinion and have just a few notes.
The line that the builder's remedy would result in "displacements" is dangerously misleading. State law provides robust protections for low income residents in rent controlled housing.
www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/open...
The line that the builder's remedy would result in "displacements" is dangerously misleading. State law provides robust protections for low income residents in rent controlled housing.
www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/open...
It was blessed by the 1926 supreme Court, who called the "apartment house .. a mere parasite, constructed in order to take advantage of the open spaces and attractive surroundings created by the residential character of the district" (aka, let non-whites afford to live near whites).
October 22, 2025 at 8:45 PM
It was blessed by the 1926 supreme Court, who called the "apartment house .. a mere parasite, constructed in order to take advantage of the open spaces and attractive surroundings created by the residential character of the district" (aka, let non-whites afford to live near whites).
New plan bay area is out. Lots of reliance on unfunded IZ, ironically followed by a claim they want to reduce construction costs.
October 22, 2025 at 5:10 PM
New plan bay area is out. Lots of reliance on unfunded IZ, ironically followed by a claim they want to reduce construction costs.
I sent her a text, objecting to her sb79 stance, as her bio recommended, and her office sent back a very misleading statement implying she couldn't respond (but really just trying to sign me up for election spam).
Yikes.
Yikes.
October 21, 2025 at 5:57 PM
I sent her a text, objecting to her sb79 stance, as her bio recommended, and her office sent back a very misleading statement implying she couldn't respond (but really just trying to sign me up for election spam).
Yikes.
Yikes.
arguing that homeowners are unjustly subsidized, so the solution is ***more subsidy*** (for renters instead of less for homeowners).
Le sigh.
Le sigh.
October 20, 2025 at 12:58 AM
arguing that homeowners are unjustly subsidized, so the solution is ***more subsidy*** (for renters instead of less for homeowners).
Le sigh.
Le sigh.
I think that's it.
October 15, 2025 at 1:26 AM
I think that's it.
The lies, they continue in his links.
October 14, 2025 at 7:52 PM
The lies, they continue in his links.
Totally normal response from a CADEM regional leader to the enactment of a CADEM supermajority endorsed housing measure.
October 14, 2025 at 7:50 PM
Totally normal response from a CADEM regional leader to the enactment of a CADEM supermajority endorsed housing measure.
Forgot to attach.
Btw, bill requires statewide minimum level of affordability, or local requirement, whichever is higher.
Btw, bill requires statewide minimum level of affordability, or local requirement, whichever is higher.
October 13, 2025 at 1:24 PM
Forgot to attach.
Btw, bill requires statewide minimum level of affordability, or local requirement, whichever is higher.
Btw, bill requires statewide minimum level of affordability, or local requirement, whichever is higher.