Dear City Council,
The impending July 1st deadline for SB 79 is not just a policy shift; it is a direct threat to the diverse residential tapestry that makes West Hollywood a community. We must first extend our profound gratitude to Councilmember John Heilman for initiating this critical Agenda Item F.2 for action at your May 18 meeting. His persistence, supported by Councilmember Lauren Meister, has finally forced a public reckoning with a law that could otherwise bypass local oversight entirely.
The 11% Coalition
Until now, the public debate has treated single-family homeowners and RSO renters as separate interest groups. The data tells a different story. West Hollywood is home to approximately 1,400 single-family properties and 1,133 rent-stabilized units in duplex buildings, according to data from the Rent Stabilization Division.
When you cross-reference these properties with our city’s household demographics, the reality becomes clear:
- Our remaining intact single-family neighborhoods house roughly 2,100 to 2,200 residents.
- Our RSO duplexes house approximately 1,700 to 1,800 renters, many of whom are fixed-income seniors.
Together, this represents 3,800 to 4,000 of our neighbors—nearly 11% of the entire population of West Hollywood. SB 79 places a bullseye directly on these low-density residential blocks, incentivizing predatory developers to replace them with 11-story market-rate towers. Protecting this vulnerable 11% is essential to maintaining the structural stability and character of the remaining 89% of our city.
Defining “Sensitive Areas”
The staff report notes that the city can temporarily exclude certain qualifying sites, but its definition of what makes a neighborhood “sensitive” remains far too narrow. We must expand this lens to include our core residential assets. An intact single-family street is a sensitive cultural and historic resource. An RSO duplex block is a sensitive social ecosystem housing our most vulnerable long-term tenants.
The Transit Oriented Development Alternative Plan (TODAP), identified as Option 4 in the staff report, is our only true legal shield. It allows the city to protect the investment of homeowners and the security of RSO renters simultaneously. By designating these intact residential interiors as “Sensitive Areas,” we can legally steer SB 79 density toward commercial corridors where high-density infrastructure actually belongs.
While our Rent Stabilization Division provides excellent relocation assistance and counseling, state-level “1-for-1” replacement rules contain systemic loopholes. As we saw with the unfortunate new development at 946-948 Hayworth, murky income-verification metrics often mean that demolished, naturally affordable units are replaced by brand-new units hitting the market at unaffordable rates. Relocation checks do not solve permanent displacement. We urge the Council to vote “Yes” on Option 4 and protect the shared fabric of our community.
–Victor Omelczenko, West Hollywood Center City Resident
Bravo & thank you, Victor! You described how our dear West Hollywood community needs to protect our homes and way of life. My first City council meeting -I sat over five hours to show my support and represent so many others. Is this the behavior of Mr. Erickson with his condescending comments refusing to accommodate the public referring to our waiting longer for discussions on the motion? I’ve been on Town Committees for over 2 decades in my previous home -we were thrilled to see our citizens and community ” come out” for our meetings. We welcomed always accommodated our… Read more »
Byers, Hang, and Erickson’s behavior last night was utterly disgraceful.
I want to thank Mayor John Heilman for not allowing Chelsea Byers and John Erickson to kill the idea of a TODAP for SB79 altogether tonight! Like I knew they would, Byers and Erickson tried their hardest to kill it with far-fetched arguments. But Mayor Heilman wouldn’t let that happen. He figured out a way, with the help of Steve Maricich (sp?) to keep it alive by bringing it up again at the city council meeting on June 15. It isn’t perfect, but at least it isn’t dead yet… and I’m sure that even though the crowd of people who… Read more »
Thank you Victor for making these points. I am not sure if I could call Norma Triangle or West Hollywood West, “low density areas”: all of these single family homes are on tiny lots as we are not in the Valley, Palmdale or the Inland Empire where homes are on way larger lots. When Sacramento wants to squeeze outsized developments into single family neighborhoods, this just does not work for the tiny lots in WeHo. We need common sense folks in Sacramento to pull back on some of these “one size fits all” legislation. That is why I am voting… Read more »
Excellent response Steve.
That is also why no one with any sense in SF should NOT be voting for Scott Weiner (an Erickson mentor)…the father of all of this BullS*tt
Right on! Residents are watching!! And we’ll be voting accordingly. If our council members vote against option four, they’ll have a hard time getting reelected for this council or for any other seat they’re seeking! They’re supposed to be fighting for us not working against us!
Three seats are up for grabs, we need to look closely at the candidates and see who is funding their campaigns. Are they union, developer, or citizen backed, it’s important to find out where the money is coming from.
Local review matters, not a one-size fits all from Sacramento. I’m in my 70’s and hoped to spend the rest of my life in West Hollywood. Older less mobile residents will become vulnerable to predatory developers snapping up properties cheaply and will destroy historic neighborhoods. SB79 makes us very vulnerable and this should be considered. Council members, please protect the elderly.
Victor-
Thank you for being one of my heroes in West Hollywood, for vocally striving to preserve its small town charms while accepting that change is inevitable. A TODAP accepts change and shakes hands with it. This is what we need now. It’s not burying our head in the sand and it’s not wholesale acquiescence. It’s answering the essential question of what we want West Hollywood to look like before the answer has been predetermined for us.
Victor understands the difference between smart urban planning and ideological overreach. Supporting Option 4 is not anti-housing — it is pro-reality. West Hollywood is already one of the densest cities in California and has long embraced urban living, transit, walkability, and multifamily housing. We are already doing more than our fair share. What residents are asking for is nuance, proportionality, and intelligent planning, not a one-size-fits-all mandate from Sacramento that treats a fully built-out 1.9 square mile city the same as sprawling jurisdictions that resisted density for decades. Inaction is not an option. Victor is right that the City must… Read more »
Sb 79 is a direct threat to the diverse residential tapestry that makes West Hollywood a community..? No it makes it more diverse..! 🤪
The existing diversity will be destroyed. No more LGBT businesses, rent control buildings, single family homes.. They will all be replaced by buildings of unaffordable units for the ultra rich. Is that diversity for you dear MIke? Stop trolling., we know where your alliances are
So your saying LGBT is not for diversity,as you speak from your rent controlled section 8 building,you make a lot of sense..Not..! I already sent you a link,on all the affordable projects that’s being built,and that has already been built,but you can’t keep track,because you have like 5 different accounts that even speak to each other,talk about being a demented troll..!
Under SB 79, without a TODAP to guide where additional density should be created, the majority of West Hollywood will be subject to canyonization. That is not what diversity looks like.
Diversity is defined as the range of human differences and all the ways in which people differ,encompassing characteristics that make one individual or group different from another..! Developers don’t need to hand out a guide to the public,it’s the public input that has derailed Developments for far too long..That’s why zoning,nimby input,regulations,permits have been eradicated,stop being scared of a changing city,it’ll just mentally snowball on you..!
Unfortunately our majority council doesn’t see the need to address SB79. They have lost touch with what is best for their constituents and only care about the developers that support their campaigns. I have no faith in the majority to do the right thing. West Hollywood is doomed
I empathize with your lack of faith, David. SB 79 will come into force and a number of ill advised and detrimental projects will most likely result, as they have with the Builders’ Remedy measure- overbuilt and underparked. I do think that SB 79 (and Builders’ Remedy) will not be with us for very long, when Californians are confronted daily with their hideous progeny and loudly rebuke their State representatives.
I would bet money that right now Erickson and Byers are figuring out b.s. language/spin to please the developers and to screw us.
Sadly, our only chance for option 4 is if Danny Hang will show that he has some balls, do what’s right and vote for it, not let the gruesome twosome cloud his judgment, prove that he isn’t their puppet, and show that he cares more about his constituents than he does about developers money! The possibility isn’t very good, but we still can hope…
It’s Solomon. He tells Byers what to say. Instead, for once, just once, understand the true character of West Hollywood’s diverse community and history and how it will be destroyed.
Do you want to keep Chelsea on the council after hearing what she said about SB 79 at tonight’s meeting?
The artwork is interesting except that Hang and Byers are not looking at their cell phones and John Erickson is not making faces at the speaker.
Thanks for the chuckle, Steve! Sorely needed these days. Also got one from Mike’s pseudo response to my comment above.
Your fake for playing the victim card,just because you couldn’t logically battle what i said..! 🤪