Thank you for the article reporting on Senate Bill 423, which, if passed, would go into effect in 2024, two years before SB 35 is supposed to sunset. SB 423 would FOREVER make environmental and coastal protection irrelevant, further expand the power of not only developers , but also the power of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). I guess the bill author knows that the State Legislature's approach to housing, pioneered by him, will never end our affordable housing problem. He is also betting that HCD will forever be setting up cities to fail. Democracy is being taken away from us, starting at the local level.

Why indefinitely? Have we learned nothing since the state ruled that the housing targets which are based on jobs are set in concrete for 8 -- EIGHT -- years even though the economy has drastically changed and the state's gone from having a huge surplus to a $31 BILLION deficit due to the layoffs, the stock market crash, rising interest rates etc etc.

Are any of us in the same place we were 8 years ago and/or will we be there indefinitely??

I understand that the state is facing a housing crisis, and I'm sympathetic to the need to build more housing. However, I believe that SB 423 is the wrong way to address this problem.

I'm concerned that SB 423 would undermine local control over land use planning. Cities and counties have a responsibility to ensure that new housing is built in a way that is compatible with their communities and that meets the needs of their residents. SB 423 would take away that authority and give it to developers.

I'm also concerned that SB 423 would lead to increased traffic congestion, pollution, and noise. New housing developments can put a strain on our infrastructure and make it more difficult to get around. SB 423 would make it easier for developers to build new housing without considering the impact on our environment and our quality of life.

Finally, I'm concerned that SB 423 would not do enough to ensure that new housing is affordable. The bill does not require developers to set aside any of their units for affordable housing. This means that SB 423 could actually make it harder for people to find affordable housing in our community.

@Brian Hamachek Yet our city is not meeting the needs of its residents. Historically, racially, nor economically. You answered your own question. Unless you speak of a certain resident in a particular neighborhood, attached to one of the ten associations. Then of course you underline the exact reason why a larger force is stepping in to actually “meet the needs of its residents” not just a certain SFH few. For example the dilapidating Alma outdated, subpar, super over priced, slum-lording going on . It appears from your post you are safe, homed in good standard, equitable, quality housing and perhaps even have control of your own property. 46% of us residing in PA don’t. And yes. As a HOH, low income working mom: I cannot relocate from a 700 sqft to an 900sqft now because I cannot prove 3 x income to asking rent. That would put me in the 125K gross income range. I earn $22 an hour. Hello.

@OnlineName. So I get it your tech stocks have diminished. I am sorry. Yet I am a local service worker supporting my kids on a low wage hourly sum of $22 (In and Out). Does that mean I yank my kids out of their successes at academics because PA can’t pony up to its social responsibility? Yes. for service worker wage earners who are extremely rent burdened right now, here in Palo Alto? My family is invested as 4th Gen Palo Altans. And I am being financially and psychologically forced out, because...while the town does back bends for Julia Morgan (McArther) Park)and Foon Chu Cannery site as historically, equitable locations of last Century inclusion while 21Century selling the sites to the highest bidders on such Antique Roadshow presentations. And. Presently there are plenty of residents crawling under a oppressive rent burdens... Go ahead tout historic sites as once the land of inclusion and fair labor practices, while selling the futures off to the past... while us in the present suffer under the hypocrisy. Gross neglect of our currency Econ labor stock of the hourly wage earner. This is where curb appeal meets the real .

@Gennady I just flashed on a thought. Why not investigate the history of Palo Alto and it’s housing/homes afforded to: A select few in the previous century. SFH owners who bought in the post WWII era up until prop 13 passed in 1979. Liberals voted this home owners tax credit in. How is that tax credit fairing in our home town PA? Surely there are an abundance of remaining residents still coveting thier low tax rate to those struggling to have a “buy” in. How does the credits hold for our Huge tech sectorStanford, Google, Facebook, Apple? Interesting to note. Apple is Cupertino,Google is Mountain View and Facebook is East PA .Yet. all these founders reside in Palo Alto. There have been housing pledges. What’s is the current on this front. Please review.