Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Senator Scott Wiener pushed through Senate Bill 35 which allowed housing developments with a percentage of affordable units to streamline the approval process in San Francisco, California Residents say they don’t want more housing units, they don’t want to live next to affordable housing Even with the incentives to...

43,762 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

32 Kommentare

Profilbild von Ave Imperator
Ave Imperatorvor 11 Tagen

If you don't like Democrat policies, then stop voting for Democrats. I live in CA and the vast majority of voters here are brainwashed retards that actively vote against their own interests. They do this at nearly every opportunity that presents itself.

Profilbild von True Freedom
True Freedomvor 11 Tagen

Government has never seen a problem it can't make worse.

Profilbild von Elite Light
Elite Lightvor 11 Tagen

Here's an interesting idea - # 1 Ship ALL the illegals OUT # 2 Ship Newscum and Bass OUT # 3 Get a professional auditor to stop the steal #4 Use taxpayers $ to FINISH a project that you start # 5 Fill that water reservoir! #6 Clean up your illegal voting That's a start!

Profilbild von Elaine larsen
Elaine larsenvor 11 Tagen

This is California’s idea of affordable, take note of income! …… Orange County, not Silicon valley!

Profilbild von David Smith
David Smithvor 11 Tagen

Averaging $600,000 per homeless person housed is crazy.

Profilbild von 4thGenCAian
4thGenCAianvor 11 Tagen

It's so much worse...that bill not also sets cookie cutter requirements on small towns like mine We had huge growth in early 2000s, not considered Pop of 50k, forced to build 2k units-so prob 15% pop boost one freeway packed nearly all day, infrastructure aging. Not considered

Profilbild von candyhorner1
candyhorner1vor 11 Tagen

This is intentional destruction, communism, all dressed up. REVOLT CALIFORNIA🇺🇸VOTE STRAIGHT REPUBLICAN NO MATTER WHAT🇺🇸find out how NOW. Think Reagan 84+ MN🇺🇸. The “dem”/communist and invader friend party: liars, cheaters, hypocrites, THIEVES and VIOLENCE. EX-long time CA dem

Profilbild von The Prescottonian
The Prescottonianvor 11 Tagen

Pedophile doing pedophile things.

Profilbild von Ms Charley
Ms Charleyvor 11 Tagen

There is plenty of desert in California why not build a homeless "city" and get them out of the cities

Profilbild von Westerly1
Westerly1vor 11 Tagen

If you do the math, a lot of “Affordable Housing” is a complete poverty trap. The income restrictions create a box. You have to pay a huge percent of your income 25-35% to cover the “affordable” rent — too much to ever build any savings — but if you get a better job or a raise, you get priced out of the box. Now you have to move. Incredible, mean-spirited scam so typical of Leftists trying to “Help.”

Profilbild von Pompliano
Pomplianovor 11 Tagen

If a cheap apartment still costs a million to build, it isn’t cheap. You sped up the paperwork You didn’t lower the bill.

Profilbild von Mike
Mikevor 11 Tagen

Keep throwing more money at the problem

Profilbild von Brent Lee
Brent Leevor 11 Tagen

🤣

Profilbild von OcalaGuy
OcalaGuyvor 11 Tagen

It’s not about affordable housing, but instead diluting the vote in areas that tend towards conservatism.

Profilbild von Amalek Defense League (ADL)
Amalek Defense League (ADL)vor 11 Tagen

Strange how this Jewish senator pushes the most deranged and destructive left wing agenda imaginable. Pro pedo laws, decriminalizing KNOWINGLY spreading AIDS, housing bills to flood communities with the third world…but for some reason (👃🏼) he went against the left on Palestine!

Profilbild von Rajit
Rajitvor 11 Tagen

Those San Francisco liberals voted him in

Profilbild von Generic Username
Generic Usernamevor 11 Tagen

"As little as $1,600" Read that again. We have to burn everything down.

Profilbild von Justin Skibs
Justin Skibsvor 11 Tagen

Just build a new city. Call it Olympus 1.

Profilbild von a8c8
a8c8vor 11 Tagen

🖕🖕

Profilbild von StonksxChaserxBitholder
StonksxChaserxBitholdervor 11 Tagen

Welcome to the land of the NIMBY

Profilbild von RogerGowan
RogerGowanvor 11 Tagen

Those prices are not realistic and really unacceptable. You would have to have a minimum income of around $200,000.00 annually to be able to afford such a rental fee, that doesn't include all of the other payments that go along with the rent; power, water, sewer, internet, etc.

Profilbild von Subspace Institute
Subspace Institutevor 11 Tagen

Nothing to see here. Just cleaning the pool. You know.....skimming

Profilbild von Michael
Michaelvor 11 Tagen

Why not just house them in Costa Rica it’s gotta be cheaper

Profilbild von AT jr
AT jrvor 11 Tagen

Dems just being dems.

Profilbild von McKiki
McKikivor 11 Tagen

Some of these land owners have found a way to sell and get out of town: affordable housing!

Profilbild von nobody
nobodyvor 11 Tagen

What a colossal waste of money.

Profilbild von David Mitchell
David Mitchellvor 11 Tagen

Sorry you voted for it get over it

Profilbild von Will Gill
Will Gillvor 11 Tagen

Put subsidy housing in the marina District… near the Golden Gate

Profilbild von ?????
?????vor 11 Tagen

This is great news, people who can't afford will be able to live in San Francisco. Why are people angry?

Profilbild von Matthew Thomas
Matthew Thomasvor 11 Tagen

Trust me, those residents will not be worried about their distance from the 8 ball

Profilbild von Cheeks
Cheeksvor 11 Tagen

Affordable housing = Blacks

Profilbild von Durwin Lloyd, ND (ret)
Durwin Lloyd, ND (ret)vor 11 Tagen

They streamlined the permit process so they could spend a million dollars of other people’s money on an apartment the neighborhood didn't ask for, then charge rent based on how little you earn while the market tenant next door pays double. That is not a housing policy. That is a machine. Scott Wiener wrote SB 35 in 2017, so projects with a slice of “affordable” units could skip the ordinary fight and get ministerial approval. He extended and hardened it with SB 423. San Francisco used it. Units appeared. The price tag did not come down. The city’s own planning work now puts affordable two-bedrooms near $1 million each, construction eating more than 60 percent. The Budget and Legislative Analyst, June 2026, prices the average LIHTC stack at $954,127 per unit and plans RHNA at a $900,000 average, with city subsidies of $405,000–$490,000 a door. Wiener’s own 2026 housing platform admits the obvious: you cannot scale a system that still costs $1 million or more per unit in San Francisco. So the “streamline” did not stream value. It streamed a political product: income-tested rooms in a building that still costs as much to erect as a luxury condo. At 50 percent of area income, you might pay about $1,600 for a one-bedroom. At 80 percent, $2,550. Same hallway, market studio ~$3,200, one-bed ~$4,300, two-bed ~$5,200. The working neighbor subsidizes the formula twice—once in tax, once in rent next door—and is told he is selfish for not wanting the project on his block. A few shops have shown you can build for half if the capital is aligned on day one. That exception indicts the rule. The rule is still a million-dollar “affordable” unit, years in the pipeline, 12,600 subsidized units waiting on money, and a senator who keeps writing faster permits for the same cost disease. Residents saying they don't want more of that product is no mystery. They can see the invoice. Streamlining a million-dollar door is not compassion. It is how a city turns housing into a permanent appropriation and calls the appropriation a home.

Ähnliche Videos

Gavin Newsom’s $101 million dollar Pacific Palisades low income housing projects EXPOSED The new housing complexes come with ‘covenants,’ after a certain amount of years they are no longer low income and convert to market rate James Li It’s a full blown land grab, “One of the largest industries that donated to him was real estate” “Let me tell you what Gavin Newsom is really up to with this hundred million dollar low income housing project in the Palisades. This ultimately is a real estate play in my opinion, because they want this building to go into nice affluent neighborhoods. Because the value of that building is going to be astronomically higher than versus building it in another area where it's underdeveloped or it's a new neighborhood, or it's more on the outskirts of la and ultimately all these affordable units that they have covenants on them. So in 15, 20, 25 years, depending on the, the exact building, all of those affordable housing units will convert to market rate. So that's why they want it in those areas. It's not because like, oh, we're helping the homeless people out. It's like, oh no, this, this is just like a giveaway to real estate developers, right? One of the largest industries that donated to him was real estate. So like this is just him placating to his donors, making sure that they're needs, quote unquote, are being met. This is a long term real estate play to say, okay, we're going to put this building here because in 25 years this building will be worth like 20x if we versus we put in another neighborhood.” It’s all about kickbacks for Gavin Newsom’s donors You know the new low income housing complexes will covenants because that’s what the other properties in LA and San Diego come with. It’s the Democrat scam

Wall Street Apes

47,016 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr