Image courtesy of https://www.facebook.com/events/1819001785023254/

The Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) will host a town hall on Saturday, December 17 from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Mission YMCA at 4080 Mission St. to discuss grassroots strategies for combating San Francisco’s housing crisis.

According to the Facebook event description, participants will weigh in on demands for a statewide Tenant Bill of Rights as well as how to “hold elected officials accountable in 2017.” The description notes that the median value of a San Francisco home, as well as the median monthly rental rate, exceeds the average family’s grasp, and also highlights city eviction rates, which have been on the rise since 2010.

The Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) is a statewide organization dedicated to empowering low- and moderate income residents, immigrants, and working families through grassroots organizing. The organization fights for housing justice as well as worker justice and voter engagement.

Follow Us

Join the Conversation

6 Comments

Please keep your comments short and civil. We will zap comments that fail to adhere to these short and very easy-to-follow rules.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. At their event page, I requested from ACCE an agenda and list of any invited speakers. No one from ACCE replied. Sure would be appreciated if Mission Local gives a report back to readers who were curious about the forum, but couldn’t make it.

  2. The best way to control housing costs (both rents and mortgages), stop displacement and ensure that everyone has a reasonably-priced place to live is to encourage — rather than discourage (as we presently do) — the creation of as much housing as possible.

    1. Whoops! Thank you Ian. This event will be at the Mission YMCA, 4080 Mission Street. I’ll add this to the story as well.

  3. The quality and character of construction has hit an all-time low. We’re taking out things like natural wood, brick, basalt, magnetic Steele, cast iron, etc. and replacing them with plastic membrane, plastic composite snap together flooring, made in china appliances, and engineered wood which means we’re literally gluing housing together now days!

    Group identity and social congruency are profound concepts well respected by researchers. But these things are inevitably tied to what they grow on; habitat. This lady argues how it literally helped cause war in Syria:
    https://www.ted.com/talks/marwa_al_sabouni_how_syria_s_architecture_laid_the_foundation_for_brutal_war

    And it is all for what? The false belief that supply/ demand will burst the bubble? But you need a surplus for that, and in a capitalistic market no developer is going to build what they do
    not believe is going to be filled and leverage is not going to be restored. Prices will flat line at best.

    What needs to be done is large scale bunkhouses in cities. Don’t build the walls and save on construction costs meaning a higher standard of materials can be set. By simply putting it on the market as an option for those who would take it such as people in between jobs, struggling students, etc. then the middle class who have nothing to do with it would have leverage restored as the monopoly of physical privacy which exists on the rental market would be broken.

    Laws of physics did not break down so we can have a conversation about density- density needs to be utilized in the vertical direction (stacked beds not just units)

    2-3 people in a room is awkward silence and feelings of intrusion, but 200-300 is much less personal. It is impersonal that is essential not necessarily privacy.

    Road to failure is paved with good intentions. Need to try something different.

    1. Correction: No developer will intentionally build a surplus as long as housing remains insanely difficult and expensive to build. And in California, the costs are dominated by the endless studies, negotiations, and fees that you have to pay up front before you can break ground.
      http://www.builderonline.com/building/regulation-policy/the-unintended-consequences-of-law_o

      Capitalists know not everybody can afford luxury. Even though Hubert Keller sells a hamburger for $5,000, Burger King’s biggest double cheeseburger meal is still under $10. Not building for the vast middle class is economic madness, unless it’s impossible to break even and make a profit doing so.

      When we have developers who don’t want to build a surplus, then they are an oligopoly of a few wasteful developers, who have specialized in navigating the complex political process and do not want competition. What we need to do is to reevaluate what is acceptable housing, remove the community’s ability to stall it with specious objections, and allow developers to come and build affordable housing.

      So some developers will make a huge profit. I don’t care. I am not driven by jealousy. I want the people to have somewhere to live.