California
Blame slow-growth policies for California’s housing and homeless crises
The roots of California’s housing problems aren’t hard to trace given the reams of house-price and population data going back decades. The Los Angeles Times reported the median price of a California home in 1970 was only 5 percent higher than the national average at $24,300. That year’s nationwide median price was $23,400, which translates to a low $181,000 in 2023 after adjusting for inflation.
So what happened? It’s basic supply and demand. Government policies since the 1970s artificially constrained housing supply through slow-growth rules, urban-growth boundaries, an increase in developer fees, environmental laws (such as the California Environmental Quality Act) and regulatory edicts including inclusionary zoning – i.e., requiring builders to set aside a percentage of under-market units. As population grew, these restrictions constrained the ability of builders to keep up with demand.
California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office points to 1970 as a pivotal year, noting that housing in the following decade soared from somewhat above the national average to 80 percent above it. Something changed in that period. The LAO’s 2015 report concluded that California was underbuilding housing by about 110,000 units a year, especially along the coast – a supply problem that has only worsened.
We often hear from coastal residents who, in arguing against new housing projects, note that not everyone has a right to live in an idyllic beachside community. Sure, one would always expect cities such as Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and Laguna Beach – with their perfect climate and magnificent views – to have higher prices than grittier inland communities.
But what these critics – virtually all of whom already own their houses – don’t say is slow-growth policies lead to prices that are much higher than they ought to be. Or that such decisions have a cascading effect, as people flee from unaffordable areas and drive up demand elsewhere until, well, prices are soaring in places like Bakersfield and Reno.
A builder-commissioned study from 2015 explains that as much as 40 percent of the price of a new single-family house in San Diego County is attributable to government fees and regulations – an issue the state hasn’t addressed in the ensuing years. Some of those costs are the direct result of fees, but much of the problem is regulatory. By reducing the amount of developable land, regulators increase the price of buildable tracts. No one has a right to live near San Diego’s coast – but let’s not pretend people are being priced out purely by market forces.
Unaffordable housing exacerbates a related high-profile problem – rampant homelessness. Homelessness is not entirely caused by housing unaffordability. It’s a multi-pronged problem driven to a large degree by addiction and mental-health issues. But regions with higher-cost housing have much higher levels of homelessness because a lack of cheaper housing leaves people on the economic margins with nowhere to go. Homelessness is a social problem that’s compounded – often dramatically so – by exorbitant housing prices.
Loosening housing-construction rules will open opportunities at the lower rungs of the housing ladder. Easing slow-growth restrictions will also make it easier for nonprofits to build temporary and transitional housing that benefit the homeless.
The state also must stop squandering resources on homelessness programs that don’t work, such as Housing First policies that incentivize construction of units that cost $800,000 or more, and start earmarking scarce public dollars toward projects that truly help our poorest neighbors. But the starting point for addressing both crises – housing unaffordability and homelessness – is reducing regulations for all housing construction.
Steven Greenhut and Wayne Winegarden are senior fellows at the Pacific Research Institute. This column is excerpted from their new book, “Giving Housing Supply a Boost.”
California
California Continues Targeting Food Additives, Dyes With Executive Order on Ultra-Processed Foods
California Governor Gavin Newsom has issued an executive order that mandates state agencies explore the food safety of ultra-processed foods, food dyes, and “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) ingredients, and recommend actions to mitigate the adverse health effects.
The executive order characterizes ultra-processed foods and ingredients as “industrial formulations of chemically modified substances extracted from foods, along with additives to enhance taste, texture, appearance, and durability, with minimal to no inclusion of whole foods.” Common examples include packaged snacks, chips, crackers, cookies, candy, sugary beverages, and highly processed meats like hot dogs and lunch meats. It also calls attention to the myriad chemicals, such as food colorants, authorized for food use in the U.S., claiming that more than 10,000 such substances are currently present in the U.S. food supply, in comparison to the 300 authorized for use in the EU.
Many food chemicals enter the nation’s food supply through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) GRAS process, which lawmakers and scientists have criticized as a “loophole” allowing potentially toxic additives in food. In a recent article by Harvard medical and law experts, the authors called GRAS a “laissez-faire approach to monitoring the safety of ingredients” that poses a threat to public health.
In this context, California has passed several precedent-setting pieces of state legislation on chemical food additives and colorants in recent years, such as the California Food Safety Act and the California School Food Safety Act.
Continuing state efforts to crack down on chemical food additives, Gov. Newsom’s latest executive order includes, but is not limited to, the following mandates:
- No later than April 1, 2025, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) will provide recommendations to the Governor’s office regarding potential actions to limit the harms associated with ultra-processed foods and food ingredients that pose a public health risk (e.g., the inclusion of warning labels on certain ultra-processed foods)
- The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), in consultation with CDPH, will investigate the adverse human health impacts of food dyes, and provide a briefing to the Governor’s office no later than April 1
- No later than April 1, CDPH and OEHHA will report to the Governor’s office on the feasibility of state-level evaluation of food additives considered GRAS, as well as state actions that can be taken if companies fail to notify FDA of certain food additives through the GRAS process
The executive order also includes actions aimed at decreasing the purchase of ultra-processed foods; increasing access to healthy foods; and improving the nutrition of and increasing the amount of fresh, local-grown ingredients used in California school meals.
Some groups have previously criticized California’s approach to food additives regulation for leading the charge on an emerging patchwork of state regulations, however. For example, prior to the passage of the California School Food Safety Act, the Consumer Brands Association (CBA) stated, “[The bill] sets a dangerous precedent for state politicians to substitute their own views on food safety ahead of the scientists and risk-based review system that stringently protects America’s food supply. Americans deserve unified guidance that follows the science, not a patchwork of confusing laws.”
California
High wind warning for California for Tuesday and Wednesday, according to the NWS
California
Perry, real-life donkey who inspired iconic 'Shrek' character, dies at 30
Monday, January 6, 2025 12:57AM
Perry, a famous donkey from Palo Alto that helped inspire the movie character “Donkey” in “Shrek,” has died.
PALO ALTO, Calif. — A famous donkey from California that helped inspire the movie character “Donkey” in “Shrek” has died.
Perry was 30 years old.
In an Instagram post, BPDonkeys, wrote on Friday, “We are heartbroken to share that our beloved Barron Park donkey, Perry, passed away yesterday at the age of 30. He was a beloved member of our community and we know many people will be touched by his passing. Memorial plans will be announced soon.”
Perry resided at Cornelis Bol Park in Palo Alto, California and served as a support animal.
Paying for his care, and for the other donkeys, slowly became a point of controversy overtime. The city faced a budget deficit last year. A city councilmember pushed back at paying tens of thousands of dollars.
A memorial will be held for Perry at a later date.
Copyright © 2025 KGO-TV. All Rights Reserved.
-
Health1 week ago
New Year life lessons from country star: 'Never forget where you came from'
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta’s ‘software update issue’ has been breaking Quest headsets for weeks
-
Business6 days ago
These are the top 7 issues facing the struggling restaurant industry in 2025
-
Culture6 days ago
The 25 worst losses in college football history, including Baylor’s 2024 entry at Colorado
-
Sports5 days ago
The top out-of-contract players available as free transfers: Kimmich, De Bruyne, Van Dijk…
-
Politics4 days ago
New Orleans attacker had 'remote detonator' for explosives in French Quarter, Biden says
-
Politics4 days ago
Carter's judicial picks reshaped the federal bench across the country
-
Politics2 days ago
Who Are the Recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom?