Comment Log Display

Dean S. Toji, Ph.D.
Affiliations: Little Tokyo Service Center, member, Board of
Directors.  Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council,
Environmental Justice Task Force, committee chair (EJTF purpose: To
increase Asian American and Pacific Islander engagement with global
warming & other environmental issues).  EJTF is a member of the 535
Coalition and endorses its Principles.

I will focus on the implementation of SB535 and the need for the
investment program to secure plentiful and permanently affordable
housing.

There is a problem that needs to be addressed.  SB535 directs
programs to be located in, or to benefit, “disadvantaged
communities.”  These communities have been operationalized as
places (zip codes) selected for the demographics and exposures of
their current populations.

The SB535 programs that will go to these places will bring many
improvements, such as: good public transportation, energy efficient
buildings and clean energy generated on-site or nearby, and urban
forests & parks.  There will be: cleaner air, shade, walkability. 
The neighborhoods will look good.  Which will attract new retail,
services, offices, jobs, & other amenities.  They’ll be nice places
to live.

They will also be magnets for gentrification: More affluent
residents move in.  Rents will go up.  Buildings that have low
rents now will be torn down and replaced.  

Low income residents will be forced out.  The zip codes will have
gotten the benefits, but not the communities that once lived
there.

Could this actually happen?  It is happening now around fixed rail
transit oriented development.  We’ve seen it happen before with
redevelopment, which destroyed neighborhoods and evicted thousands
of low income residents in California.  It took major conflicts to
bring about the reforms that added affordable housing as a
requirement for redevelopment projects.

In order to meet the goals SB535: 

1. The investment programs have to generate LOTS of affordable
housing.  I’m sure you have received other comments on the need to
have large amount of affordable near transit in order to
effectively reduce net greenhouse gas emissions.  The extreme
social need that could be addressed by the increase of affordable
housing is a profound co-benefit.

2. The housing must be PERMANENTLY affordable, especially because
the market forces generated by the new infrastructure will always
threaten displacement.  The investment programs should fund the
non-profits that build, own and operate affordable housing.  They
are dedicated to that purpose, and won’t flip the housing for
profit.

3. We also need to PRESERVE EXISTING affordable housing.  For
example, thousands of units in the Los Angeles area are in danger
because the affordability agreements that came with the subsidies
are expiring.  The funding programs can and should be targeted to
save such housing near transit and in the 535-designated areas.

In summary: 
If the investment program does not secure affordable housing it
would defeat the purpose of SB535.
In order for the implementation of SB535 to actually benefit
disadvantaged communities, the investment program must secure
affordable housing, lots of it, and permanently.