Jerry RobertsBy Jerry Roberts of
(Jerry Roberts’ note: Earlier this week, Newsmakers published an open letter from former Mayor SheiIa Lodge to Supervisor Das Williams, critiquing his recent public comments, lambasting the city of Santa Barbara’s planning process as an obstacle to building new housing at the necessary speed and scope. He asked for equal space so today we’re publishing his response).
By Das Williams
I wanted to take the time to respond to former Mayor Lodge’s letter to me about the housing crisis. I am heartened that my comments have prompted a community discussion because it’s clear to me that the housing crisis is one of the greatest threats our community faces today.
Let’s start with the facts. The housing market in Santa Barbara, which saw a 34 percent increase in median apartment rent price in just one year, is eliminating the ability for young people, our children and grandparents, and people of color, like myself and many others who work here, to live here.
This crisis is also threatening our environment and accelerating climate change by forcing our workforce to leave our community and make super-commutes in gas-powered cars.
For the first time in decades, oil drilling is no longer the biggest source of pollution in our County – that dubious honor has been claimed by oil burning, in the form of gas-powered transportation.
What changed?
Over the last 50 years, our community continued to grow more prosperous, as new forms of economic growth created more jobs. However, production of new homes all but stopped. Until recently, Santa Barbara did not approve a single new private apartment unit for 40 years.
But we all share the blame. SBCAG’s analysis found that the County, as well as all South Coast cities, are far behind the curve when it comes to approving enough housing to meet the needs of our residents.
AUD program is not enough. Now today, more rental housing is being built across all cities and the unincorporated area on the South Coast, thanks to initiatives like Santa Barbara’s AUD program, and new state legislation.
It may seem like the modest amount of new units aren’t making enough of a difference in prices. But it will take more than a few hundred units to correct the rental market after policymakers have starved the market of new housing for decades.
So we must make strides to meet our state-mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) housing goals, not try to thwart them.
Our best chance at meeting this need, and addressing the crisis of climate and affordability is high-density housing in downtowns and commercial areas near transit. We have the generational opportunity to create new neighborhoods that are car-free, and affordable to working people.
I understand the desire that Mayor Lodge expresses to bring opposing sides together in compromise. But the people who need our help most – young, working people, and seniors – are often not at the table for discussions about housing, and are left out of these community conversations and “compromises.”
From canvassing thousands of people in our community, I have learned two truths: Our community cares deeply about protecting our environment and knows that climate science is real. And the vast majority of people know just how bad the housing crisis has gotten, and want their elected leaders to act – and fast.
That’s why I support actions that expedite the construction of affordable housing. I am also skeptical of well-intentioned efforts by government that may inadvertently slow down or block new housing – or worse, be hijacked by a small minority that says “Not In My Backyard.”
A critical choice. As this crisis gets more intense each day, I believe our community and our government institutions face a crossroads.
(Das Williams / courtesy)
Will we follow in the footsteps of our predecessors and stand up for our environment, as they did in the aftermath of the 1969 oil spill?
Will we give our kids and grandkids a fighting chance to continue living in this special community?
Or will we ignore this crisis, and carry on business as usual?
The choice is ours.
Das Williams is the First District representative on the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors.
Read more news at
Maybe he should move to Amsterdam.
And what about all these wall street firms buying up houses for rentals? Don’t know much about these but in our neighborhood, some company ‘falsely’ bought a friend’s house. They pretended to be a young couple with a family. Bought the house and then it sat empty for months. Now occupied by some people who are here temporarily. I believe these investment companies are buying houses all over the country, jacking up rental prices.
The water will come from the farm the housing is built on. Agriculture uses the vast majority of the water in california, and domestic use accounts for just a small fraction of water consumption. If california had no housing whatsoever and only agriculture, there would still be a water shortage. By contrast, if agricultural water use were reduced by a small fraction it would free up enough water to double California’s population. By covering irrigated farmland with multistory housing, water use is reduced and new housing units are made available. It’s a win-win for water conservation and housing.
Das, Das, Das, “car free” and “affordable housing” ?? Really? Totally clueless to reality. That will never happen. Why don’t you add in “free weed for all”? Come on SB voters, we can do better.
This is 100% this issue! I hate it when politicians make rules they never have to live by. YOU live by it first, THEN we will think about it!
Supporting a real living wage will help workers afford housing. A minimum wage of $15.50 doesn’t begin to help workers afford housing. It is past time to substantially increase wages. That will do more to solve the housing crisis than anything. Why don’t you propose an increase in the minimum wage?
Something that we don’t talk about in the “car free” context is the cost of vehicle ownership. The average new vehicle is now over $40,000 plus maintenance, fuel, insurance, etc. We talk about the cost of rent and how less affluent people are burdened with housing costs, but why don’t we talk about how much people spend on transportation? If we continue to develop our cities in a way that forces people to drive to get to jobs and services, then the transportation cost burden will continue. If we want to lift people out of poverty then quit forcing people to own a vehicle to exist in our society. To make it worse, those that can’t afford to live here often have to pay for their long commutes.
I agree that going 100% car free is a pipe dream, but we need to start bending the curve so people have options.
If a new apartment building is proposed downtown with no parking, the first question is usually “then where will people park”? That’s missing the point. If people want to live in that building then they have a decision to make. They can go car free if they’re able, and reduce their transportation cost. Or seek parking elsewhere and pay the cost. Currently the cost of parking is built into everything, but if it is separated out, some people will make different choices.
They would just love their constituents to be in happy little blocks with no means of transport.
Take away all the guns and you’ve got martial law minus the vocabulary.
It’s not the future I want either bird, but it seems inevitable unless people in california change how they vote on a massive scale. The status quo is pushing hard for high immigration rates, and rapid development of high density housing to accommodate the growing population. If we clamped down on immigration, the birth rate is so low that our population would decline. However, the objective of high immigration rates trumps all other considerations. At the same time, there is a push for water conservation rather than developing additional water resources to meet demand. As I explained, converting farmland to high density housing dramatically reduces water use. Therefore rapid construction of high density housing will continue until voting trends change.
this from the guy who has personally benefit from making SB County the largest pot producer. Hi density is a sanitized word for a slum neighborhood. Don’t we have enough gang problems>
What is Das’s solution for supplying water to all the new folks he wants to shack up?
I met Das many years ago at a funeral for a police officer. He was just starting his venture as a politician. I mentioned to him how sad that my son and many of his local friends have to move due to high rents and housing, His answer surprised me in a very arrogant tone he said anyone can live here all they have to do is work and work hard. Well I have news for him I know a lot of people at work very very hard and still can’t afford to live here. We just can’t keep stuffing people in. The beauty of Santa Barbara has always been the open lands the yard fidget children can play in. The streets that aren’t packed with cars at the stores that aren’t packed with people. I just spent the week in a large city where you had lines to get into every store restaurant or packed grocery stores packed it was the most stressful week we don’t want to have Santa Barbara Stressful Pl., Santa Barbara is a peaceful place. Let’s not allow it to become Orange County. When people move out people can move in. The stuffing people in every square inch is ridiculous. And I agree it would be nice not to have cars but that’s not gonna happen. And yes I think it would be a very good idea for DOS to go without a car for a year. Do what I sayNot as I do. I have pictures of Dos returns day affair that made it very clear everyone was to wear masks and there he was sitting on his phone in a crowd of people with no mask. I think we all get a little tired of this attitude.
Das Williams: You say “…..it’s clear to me that the housing crisis is one of the greatest threats our community faces today.”
Not at all. One of, if not the greatest threat, is voting for pols who are out of touch. Ms. Lodge clearly has your number, but one can only be “schooled” if one is willing to be “schooled.” Do your job Mr. Williams and don’t worry about getting us more weed/weed/weed as you’ve clearly demonstrated. If anything, please suggest to those who are padding your pockets with weed money to lower the cost of their products. I don’t think you want to go down in history as only promoting the weed industry, while doing nothing about more dire needs facing the community….and that “need” is not housing. Clearly, those who can afford to live here find housing, and for the most part do NOT seek out HIGH DENSITY HOUSING!
Crazycakes, pretty sure that when you say the greatest threat is voting for politicians who are out of touch, you mean, voting for people that Crazycakes disagrees with.
Probably not “the greatest threat to our community.”
Exactly.
We have a Das problem, duh
Alex- Who says anything about internet conspiracy? I’m not citing sources in my comment. It’s my opinion. How undemocratic of you. At least I’m capable of civil conversation lmao
They have been trying to get us content with less for a long time.
Chip–
“The status quo is pushing for high immigration rates.”
Let’s start with that. By status quo, I assume you mean the ongoing political powers that be, i.e., the Democrats.
Correct? Yes or no?
If yes, now exactly where are you seeing any sort of push for immigration to California?
In FACT, California’s population is declining.
So is there some sort of platform from the party in power to reverse that decline that you can point to? Is there some sort of legislation proposed to support reversing that? Is there some sort of stated policy that you can point to anywhere that advocates for INCREASING immigration in to California from anywhere at all?
Do you have a shred of evidence to support your claim?
SBSTONER
You really need to spend more time smoking weed and less time smoking the conspiracy theories that you find not he internet.
Who is this housing for? Why do we need more people here? Thousands of units for who? Why are we trying to get more people to live here? The people who currently reside in SB that can’t afford housing won’t be able to afford these. This is just more $$ for developers and more crap on Goleta and Carp who will be shouldering the burden. We don’t need more housing.