After three attempts in four years, SF-based state Sen. Scott Wiener’s plan to make it easier for churches and universities to develop housing has finally landed on the governor’s desk in the final week of California’s legislative session.
If Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this latest version of the proposal, dubbed SB 4, it will be a boon for religious institutions that want to build affordable housing on their underused properties, but can spend years tied up in red tape. The new law, which also applies to certain colleges and universities, would let them bypass potential appeals. (Read more about the many tests of faith inflicted by SF’s development process.)
After SB 4 passed in the legislature, Wiener emphasized that California needs every new home (and development tool) it can get. “Hundreds of faith communities and nonprofit colleges have excess land that can and should be used for affordable housing,” he wrote in an email to The Frisc.
David Huerta, president of the SEIU labor union, emailed a statement encouraging Newsom to sign the final bill as another step toward addressing the housing crisis. Union opposition helped sink previous versions of the law.
The law looks beneficial on paper, especially in areas with lots of land. In SF, where state mandates require 82,000 new homes — more than half affordable — by 2031, schools and houses of worship might not make a big difference.
In 2020, UC Berkeley’s Terner Center estimated that 162 religious sites in the city, making up about 100 acres of land, would become eligible for new housing development under the law. A new Terner analysis adds college lands to the tally — another 180 acres.
The real potential lies elsewhere. Across the 11 urban counties Terner surveyed across the state, college properties dwarf religious sites, with almost 125,000 eligible acres compared with 47,000 for holy lands.
Terner found that that more than 90 percent of the highlighted SF religious properties are in moderate, high, and highest resourced neighborhoods, while nearly three-quarters of school properties are in those neighborhoods.
That doesn’t mean SF shouldn’t press hard for SB 4-related housing. Terner also found that the places in SF with the most room to build are exactly where the city has historically resisted affordable housing. These “high resource” (read: wealthy) neighborhoods are exactly where the city’s latest big-picture housing plan says we need to start developing as soon as possible — or else state regulators could bring harsh penalties.
Turning educators to builders
But while colleges are poised to be the biggest potential winners of this four-year Sacramento crusade, many aren’t positioned to take advantage of it. Representatives from the University of San Francisco and California College of the Arts both told The Frisc they’re not presently planning any new housing, with CCA noting that they don’t have enough land to develop.
Golden Gate University says it “does not have a position” on the new law or its housing implications, while the SF Conservatory of Music replies that “this isn’t really something SFCM would be a part of,” and defers to larger institutions.
Over in Fremont, San Francisco Bay University’s president Nick Ladany is more encouraging: “Housing has been top of mind as we’re discussing how to prioritize access to higher education for underserved students,” and SFBU hopes to have affordable housing plans to share down the line.
The one place that seems most eager to get into the housing game is City College of San Francisco. “SF is increasingly unaffordable for both our students and our staff, and it’s really important that city colleges have the space and the opportunity to build housing,” says CCSF Board of Trustees president Alan Wong.
Wong emphasized that housing is a question for the full board to consider, but he makes it clear he’s eager to start unrolling blueprints. Another CCSF trustee, Aliya Christi, points out that just in August she proposed plans for new student housing.
If CCSF is to make a big push for more homes, however, it won’t get help from SB 4 clearing SF’s many hurdles. According to Sen. Wiener’s staff, CCSF as a not-for-profit institution is ineligible to benefit from SB 4.
CCSF has been down this road before. In 2016, the college tried to turn its 46,000 square-foot administrative offices at 33 Gough St. into more than 400 new homes with the help of two developers, local Equity Community Builders and Atlanta-based Integral.
It appeared to be a win-win — creating new housing while improving the college’s economic fortunes. But then came the usual argle-bargle over how much affordable housing would be enough, and the proposal became another classic San Francisco development fiasco. (ECB did not return repeated requests for comment; an Integral rep did respond, but wasn’t able to locate anyone who worked on the 33 Gough project in time.)
CCSF’s one housing success story is the Balboa Reservoir, where since the 1980s the city has made one bid after another to transform a parking lot leased by the college into a new neighborhood. At last, it is slated to break ground in 2024.
Housing hopes
It’s a lesson San Francisco has to learn: legislation, however ambitious, can only carry us part of the way toward housing goals. Entities like colleges, churches, and other property owners that want to build need help.
“A lot of groups have access to land but not the [other] resources to develop it; a partnership can help with that,” says David Vásquez-Levy, president of the Pacific School of Religion, meaning that either cities, private developers, or both need to step in and help plan and finance such endeavors.
“The appetite on both sides is significant,” Vásquez-Levy adds, both sides being the churches and schools in this case. PSR previously spent nine years unsuccessfully trying to create senior housing on its Berkeley campus.
So bit by bit, site by site, there’s work to whittle away at the housing crisis. Along with SB 4, state legislators also sent SB 423 to the governor; it’s a renewal of SB 35, Wiener’s signature housing law and the bane of NIMBYs everywhere. Newsom has already signed AB 1307, the bill by East Bay Assemblymember Buffy Wicks that exempts residential projects like student dormitories from noise appeals under CEQA.
Three other bills that would chip away at the CEQA plinth, including AB 1633 by SF Assemblymember Phil Ting, have also landed on the governor’s desk, all part of an unusually productive session on housing. Newsom has until Oct. 14 to sign new legislation into law.
One interesting wrinkle about Wiener’s SB 423: A late addition zeroes in on San Francisco, requiring the city to report to state watchdogs every year on its housing progress, instead of every four years. That means places of worship and education might have more than a prayer for building places to live.
Correction, 10/1/23: A previous version of this story wrongly identified the ownership of the Balboa Reservoir parking lot. City College of San Francisco is the long-time leaseholder, not the owner.