Sam Alcorn

Sam Alcorn

@samalcorn.bsky.social

Housing abundance. Urbanism. Zoning abolitionist. Accessibility Compliance expert. YIMBY. Located in Tovaangar. #OverturnEuclid

1.2K followers1.2K following2.7K posts

Sam Alcorn reposted

Wow

Chris Elmendorf@cselmendorf.bsky.social

CA cities that disapprove housing projects are in a world of hurt. New Court of Appeal decision sets up developer lawsuits for damages, at least where state law requires a ministerial permit (SB 35/423, AB 2011, SB 684, and more). Shi v. Palos Verdes. threadreaderapp.com/thread/21141...

Sam Alcorn reposted

One of the more deceptive accusations against a land value tax is that it will "tax people off of land." In reality, an LVT taxes people ON to valuable land or compensates them if they're not residing on valuable land. No one is landless with LVT; it perpetually guarantees land to people for life!

Somehow, I ended up on a phone list for Republicans in Texas. I get texts from them urging me vote a certain way on things that aren’t for me to vote on here. If I were able to vote somewhere I didn’t live, I certainly wouldn’t vote the way they want. This one was too funny not to share:

Sam Alcorn reposted

Sam Alcorn reposted

I just got a text message saying that Prop 39 is bipartisan. That's a lie. It's being promoted by Trump-aligned voting disinformation spewers. Who are you gonna believe, MAGA; or The League of Women Voters, ACLU and Common Cause? ballotpedia.org/California_P...

ballotpedia.orgCalifornia Proposition 39, Voter Identification, Citizenship Verification, and Registered Voter List Administration Initiative (2026)
Dr Grace S Peng@gspeng.bsky.social

If you are a California voter, Vote No on on Prop 39, a MAGA constitutional amendment to make it harder to vote noonprop39.com/wp-content/u...

Ballot propositions are out of control. I get the idea that file some things you can’t trust the legislature to fairly vote on them: how else are we going to achieve multi-member districts with proportional representation? But relying on ballot props to legislate is dangerous.

Asking each voter, with very little time to spend on it, to carefully weigh the pros and cons of dozens of wonky proposals is beyond absurd. The current process is SO ripe for regulatory capture and deceit of the public.

Seeing ads against Prop 40 and for 41 and 42? The PAC behind them, Building a Better California, has raised $229M, largely from billionaires. Sergey Brin alone has put in over $100M. The billionaire tax is being fought with billionaire money.

Prop 40 would hit roughly 200 California billionaires. Props 41 and 42 are billionaire-funded measures designed to nullify it. Prop 43 is sponsored by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and funded mostly by the Business Roundtable (Peter Thiel is a top donor). Yes on 40, No on 41-43.

Paying rent or a mortgage every month and believing supply and demand don't apply to housing is like paying triple for a seat on a sold-out flight and calling it a coincidence.

<sarcasm> I know: let’s put as many housing units as possible on wide roads that are hard to cross, with cars and trucks whizzing by constantly! Brilliant! Who needs to live on a quiet street anyway? Why on earth would anyone want that? </sarcasm>

Sam Alcorn reposted

Replying to @samalcorn.bsky.social

How did Southern Spaniards adapt to hot weather? NARROW FUCKING STREETS. They are narrow on purpose!

It’s hotter every year, and with the sun beating down through cloudless skies, I genuinely don’t get how shade can be bad.

Kirsten Bladh@kerstanley.bsky.social

Why can't LA build more affordable housing? Well, you see, because a building located in an R5(CW) zone shall not cast a shadow on a lot located in the R4 or R5 zone for more than two hours each day between the hours of 9AM and 3PM on the Winter Solstice and 9AM and 5PM on the Summer Solstice.

Something I think about often is how planes landing on aircraft carriers increase their throttle just as they’re about to touch down. This is exactly what we need in the short time before the elections. Don’t get complacent due to the favorable polls. We need a full-court press up to the buzzer.

Is your goal reducing carbon emissions? Legalize apartments. Is your goal advancing social justice? Legalize apartments. Is your goal reducing segregation? Legalize apartments. Is your goal reducing housing costs? Legalize apartments.

View full thread

Is your goal reducing road deaths? Legalize apartments everywhere. Is your goal that children be able to play outside again? Legalize apartments everywhere. Not just on broad streets that are impossible to cross safely, with cars and trucks whizzing by.

Is your goal that kids grow up with lots of friends outside of school and paid activities? Is your goal that kids can get around on bikes? Is your goal that kids develop a sense of independence? Legalize apartments everywhere.

Is your goal reducing carbon emissions? Legalize apartments. Is your goal advancing social justice? Legalize apartments. Is your goal reducing segregation? Legalize apartments. Is your goal reducing housing costs? Legalize apartments.

The state of California should acquire Kaiser Permanente and make all residents of California members. We need universal healthcare now! And this seems like it could be a good way to get there.

We need legislation that prevents high road design speeds paired with low speed limits. If you’ve got multiple arrow-straight lanes on your stroad, and the speed limit is set to 35 mph, those lanes shouldn’t be allowed to be the same width you’d find on a limited-access highway.

Widespread driving of private cars absolutely fucked our cities and their people in so many ways. The deleterious effects have been occurring for a very long time, and will persist for many generations to come.

I said “very long time,” which is true when considered in the context of a single living person’s experience. But in historical terms, it’s a very short time. My great-grandparents were among the first generations of people to witness the rise of cars.

I was so proud of my state senator for voting the right way on SB 79 last year. But with the BS that is SB 1090 (let’s pray the Governor vetoes it; call his office to urge that!), I’m not sure she’ll have my vote next time…

Stopping unsolicited offers to buy land after the whole area is destroyed I can sort of understand. Telling families they can’t split their lots so they might be able to afford to rebuild and remain in the place they love: that’s just gross…

And she says it’s to _avoid_ gentrification. How do you think something gets expensive? By having more of it, or by artificially constraining its production?

🤔👇

Kirsten Bladh@kerstanley.bsky.social

TIL that Mohamed Atta was a professional urban planner, of the preservationist nimby persuasion, and that his graduate school thesis was about how high-rises ruin neighborhood character 😳.

Read this thread for insight into how regulatory capture happens on the ground:

Mo Zhu@moinmybackyard.bsky.social

We are now in a sales pitch. A gentleman from FireAvert, a retired firefighter. When smoke detectors go off, this cuts the power to the stove. We prevent ~50 fires a week. A few hundred dollars to install. Reduces waste-of-time calls. About a million of them installed, mostly multifamily.

The way to reverse exclusionary zoning is by eliminating exclusionary zoning. If anyone claims its effects can be ameliorated by introducing more rules on top of the existing ones, and especially if they’re trying to EXPAND exclusionary zoning, know they’re doing so in bad faith. #OverturnEuclid

Patrick Siegman@siegman.biz

San Francisco's 2023 housing plan “talks a big game about reversing exclusionary zoning. But here we have, as plain as day, a proposal to reintroduce exclusionary zoning near a major transit stop. And it comes from the President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.”