Letter to the Editor

| June 8, 2023 | 0 Comments

When Senator Scott Wiener of California introduced Senate Bill 10 (SB 10), he was quoted as saying “Single-family homes and yards are immoral”.   Wiener, along with Senator Toni Atkins, sponsored SB 10 with the intent of abolishing single-family zoning and allowing up to 10 units on a single parcel within those neighborhoods.  The ideology of bashing individualism, personal success and the aspiration to own a single-family home is antithetical to the American spirit.  It is incomprehensible that being rewarded with the ownership of a single-family home through hard work could be considered “immoral” by some of our government representatives.   

This summer, Mayor Todd Gloria and our City Council will be voting whether to implement SB 10 in San Diego, making our city the first in California to consider adopting a bill that will be devastating to the character and community culture of our neighborhoods.  Imagine 10-unit buildings being built up and down the streets of Mission Hills, for instance, often without any accommodation for parking – as none is being required.    SB 10 even allows these dense structures to be built in fire hazard zones within single-family neighborhoods.  And, if passed,  SB10 can never be undone EVEN if there are significant negative consequences and community push back and opposition.   

Why would our Mayor and City Council want San Diego to be the first city in California to experiment in adopting SB 10 without thoroughly understanding the potential liabilities such a mandate would create.  Why wouldn’t our representatives take the pulse of the residents and property owners that have cared for and nurtured San Diego’s neighborhoods first. 

While most of us appreciate the need for additional housing in San Diego, it is critical that planning for such housing be thoughtfully conceived along with careful assessments of the environment impacts on our neighborhoods and region.  San Diego already suffers from water shortages given the ongoing drought along with energy grid lapses.  The state of our roads and the intensity of our local traffic raise the question of how the City intends to deliver the necessary infrastructure for water, gas and electricity, and road services to accommodate this housing. 

City representatives claim that the addition of these dense residential structures will reduce homelessness.  Yet realistically, many who are homeless in San Diego are sadly afflicted by addiction or mental illness and need rehabilitation, medical care and workforce training as initial priorities. 

Those of us who have lived in single-family neighborhoods for decades have contributed mightily to the larger community of San Diego – through the businesses we own, the employees we hire, the taxes we pay and the philanthropic contributions we make to local charities.  We pay high property taxes in the hope our neighborhoods are well cared for and safe.  If SB 10 is adopted, it will undo the architectural soul and character of San Diego that draw so many people to our city.

People seem to be exiting California in unprecedented numbers and sadly if SB 10 passes, I believe this will only hasten the exit of many local residents who have been an important part of the economic lifeblood and prosperity of San Diego. 

As the City considers the future of SB 10, I hope they first listen to the concerns of the constituents who have made such a meaningful economic and cultural contribution to the city we all love. 

Nadine Corrigan

Tags: ,

Category: Government, Housing, Life Style, Local News

About the Author ()

General articles by the Presidio Sentinel and Associated Partners.