After the Ashes: A Beautiful Altadena Podcast

Episode 7: AB782 & SB9 — The Quiet Bills That Could Change Altadena Forever

• Shawna Dawson Beer

Share episode

We're back in bed with these bills. Did we ever really leave? In this episode, we’re breaking down the latest on AB782, which has already passed behind closed doors and is now sitting on Governor Newsom’s desk just waiting for a signature. No ballot. No community input. No chance to vote or veto. This is how gentrification and densification gets ushered in — quietly and without consent.

We connect the dots between AB782, SB9, and Altadena’s own Community Standards District (CSD) — and what this trio really means for our neighborhoods. Spoiler: it’s not the character of the community we lost. 

Plus, we touched on AB679 and the idea of Zone Zero Defensible Space — what’s legit fire protection policy, and what might be more cause for concern?

🔥 CALL TO ACTION: It’s time to write, call, and email Governor Newsom — and let him know Altadena did NOT ask for this (AB782, SB9 and AB679), and we do NOT want this. Blow up his office inbox, flood the phone lines, and make our voices impossible to ignore.

And for our small business shoutout we’re showing love to CR Citrus, a (currently displaced) Altadena local crafting delicious smoked citrus products for cocktails and mocktails. You can find them at Altadena Bev on Allen. Go support them at:

🍊 @crcitrus
🥂 @altadenabev

Community power is real — let’s show them how Altadena shows up. Let’s keep going. Tune in and stay activated.


SPEAKER_01:

Welcome back. It's After the Ashes, the Beautiful Altadina podcast that breaks down legislation and recovery after urban wildfire. That's a nice word for it. This is your co-host, Shauna Dawson Beer from Beautiful Altadena, and this is episode seven, which we have titled AB 782 and SB9: The Quiet Bills That Could Change Altadena Forever. That's such a nice title for such a icky topic. So we're back in bed with these bills, Steve.

SPEAKER_00:

Oh, I was enjoying doing the opposite, the last one.

SPEAKER_01:

I know. Did we did we ever leave? Did we ever get out of bed with 782 and SB9? I don't think we have.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, we're coming to the end. I mean, that's the good part about this is it it we're the the as I as I've written on the Substack, the uh the I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Now, what that means, I don't know what's on the other side, but um it is kind of nice to be coming to the end of this process and beginning whatever is gonna be new.

SPEAKER_01:

It is. So can you give us an update? Where we at I well listen, I think people know that 782 passed the Senate.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, it's sitting on the governor's desk.

SPEAKER_01:

Right. So can you explain for everyone listening what that means, how long things sit on the desk, what could happen.

SPEAKER_00:

I mean, that's a really good question, because uh when you go Google the California Senate, um it tells you that the bills are supposed to be signed or vetoed within 12 days. And again, signed means physical signature or no action, which then means the bill passes just by virtue of the fact that there is no veto. So but with the 700 plus bills that get thrust through at the end of the legislative session, it seems that I guess they get an extra, give them a 30-day window to evaluate, let people have their time, to you know, bring their concerns to the governor so he can have his last-minute deal making that goes into, well, if you want me to veto it, what are you gonna give me type of thing? So and you know, for communities to stand up if there's a community-based bill or interest groups to be able to say, okay, hey, governor, we want you aware of this, that this bill is not good for us, and the governor decides. Typically the governor signs bills that are that have, you know, I would say, you know, like a just a public policy type thing or somewhere he can get like the a big issue, like AI, for instance, and regulating AI, and that was something the governor was gonna veto or sign, you know, like those types of bills. A lot of the little stuff, like the stuff we're talking about here, the stuff that it's big to us, but in the bigger scheme of things, it's considered esoteric. Those bills typically just kind of sail through or get vetoed quietly and move on. But most bills will get through. I think the governor only vetoes less than 20% of the bills, is at least what someone told me.

SPEAKER_01:

And what compels the governor to veto a bill at this stage.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, I mean, I think most of the bills that he vetoes are showboat bills that come out of the assembly and the senate that you know are trying to prove a policy point, and in actuality, the the policy really isn't being served, so the governor has to act as that veto on it. But it's a way of the governor and the legislature to say, Well, look, interest groups, we did what you asked us to do. And the governor said, Well, yes, you did, great, you made your point, but this isn't good policy. So, I mean, essentially what 782 is, but that's a different story. We'll get into that in a minute. By the way, I want to give a shout out. We have a listener that is 10 years old and listens to us all the time and makes his mom listen to this podcast on repeat. So, Mr. Avery Goldman, this is for you. I told you, I told your mom I'd give you a shout-out. I'm doing it right now. So you can put this on repeat.

SPEAKER_01:

Avery, public action, civic action, civic advocacy is so critical to how our world functions or does not. I love that you're a listener. And I apologize to you and your mother for my very fouled mouth.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, this one is not the foul one.

SPEAKER_01:

I I promise to try to be less fired up and and potty mouthed in today's episode. Oh, look, you're because I can't afford the swear jar.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, but the last one that that's you were you were doing you were that voicing what the community felt.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00:

And the reason why we wanted to keep it very focused was it sets the tone for what we're talking about here, which is the government, the dereliction of duty from government. And you know, we really wanted to hone in on the last one. This is not something new, right? Shauna? Like this is something, according to the Times, and which is quoting Shauna from before when you were speaking at the event. This goes back to 2018 and before. Like, we're just recycling, it's rinse, wash, repeat, and write a report, sit there and put it on the shelf and then wait for the next one. Oh, oops, well, you know, and and and we can't keep doing that. I mean, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. And that's why it's important for our community to understand, you know, whether it's 782, whether it's SB9, whether it's uh, you know, AB 797, like where are we going? Because if we're just gonna keep retreading the same things and not moving the ball, it's just we're gonna have the same reports saying the same thing with the same failures and it's a good idea.

SPEAKER_01:

It's the definition of insanity. Yeah, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

SPEAKER_00:

And and it's time for us as a community and us as a state and us as a country to demand of our leaders true leadership. You know, I I I tried I did this in a post back in April, and I think it's important to talk about the difference between management and leadership. Management is something that we look to in times of peace and times of normalcy where everything just kind of is cop aesthetic. But there are times when we need leaders. Leaders step up, leaders are uncomfortable, leaders are noisy, leaders are unpredictable, leaders are leaders create situations that managers can exist in. But it feels like when you think about the history of LA, I was talking to a very illustrious person, Nick Past Pastra Pastor.

SPEAKER_01:

I can never pronounce his name either.

SPEAKER_00:

No, I and I'm Nick, I'm so sorry if you're hearing this. But I was talking to him about this conversation back when, you know, the guys built, when we built this city back in the 70s and 80s, when we were on this rise. And, you know, again, the whole redistricting thing goes back to all of those times where the population was growing, we were building homes, we were economically driven, the city was moving in the right direction. And then things started to peak, and now we're kind of in this trough. I'm sorry to those that don't agree with me. I we had a bit of an engagement on this on the Substack this week, but you know, we are feeling a trough here. And you know, the question becomes how much of this is a leadership question? And so as we're looking at the response to the fires, I've been saying since the end of March, beginning of April, we need leaders. We don't need managers. Managers have gotten us to where we are today. Managers put out reports and talk about the same things, and then we don't ever get anything done because their job is to just manage everybody. We need to change things, we need to blow things up. That's what Shauna and her groups were saying last week. And that's what we are, that's where we are right now. We're at a threshold and we're at a crossroads. And I think with 782, the bill represents a true crossroads for us as a community, not just for Al Tadena, not just for the Palisades, but for a state, because every disaster, we're gonna have more disasters, is gonna have these challenges. So, with that, that's where we stand, and I think that it's important to understand that macro level distinction as we get into the discussion of the issues.

SPEAKER_01:

So getting into the discussion of the issues, for anyone who's joining us today and perhaps has not caught episodes one through six, um, I don't know, I don't know how that's possible, okay? But you know it's all about us all the time. It's right. Um, and to that point, actually, um for those who have been listening all along who are thinking, oh my gosh, the episodes are a little shorter, um, we realize that you know we were running 45, 50 minutes on some of our episodes because there's a lot to talk about. But we're gonna try and break them up into a little bit shorter, sweeter, and try to keep these tight at 30 minutes or so so that you know you're not all falling asleep at the wheel while you listen to us because we don't want that. So, with that, for anyone who's just joining us, Steve, can you give us a quick overview of 782 again?

SPEAKER_00:

All right, 782 is the bill Sasha Perez created, and what it does is it's or she's sponsored, and it's a climate resilience district. So, what we have here in California are these economic infrastructure financing districts, or the modern version of Community Reinvestment Act or Community Uh Redevelopment Act. Community reinvelop redevelopment acts or agencies. So these are the agencies that you know built Old Town back when Old Town was, you know, all bars and tattoo parlors and other things that people don't understand.

SPEAKER_01:

And for anyone wondering we're talking about Old Pasadena.

SPEAKER_00:

Yes, sorry. And um, you know, so these these these agencies were created and they would use these the the tax money would tax increment fine, it tax increment increases, and use that money to fund, you know, these redevelopments. And you know, in some cases they were good, but they kind of grew out of their element and they got a little bit too big for their britches. And so in 2010, Jerry Brown, the governor, killed them, or 2012 and said no more. And so since that time, we have been here trying to figure out okay, what do we do? They created these economic infrastructure financing districts to kind of replace the CRDs in 2014 or so. And since then, they've only done one bond issuance for tax increment financing, which is West Sacramento, which took till 2025 to get it done for$57 million. It's not, it's a drop in the bucket for what we're looking at. And now all of a sudden, we're gonna take this model that really hasn't been proven and use it to rebuild an entire town, and we're gonna do it all around increasing property values. Now, that for property holders, that's good.

SPEAKER_01:

Well, but is it? I mean, it is, but isn't it?

SPEAKER_00:

You know, and so that's sort of the now we're getting into and and so as we've gotten closer and closer to the end here, you know, the pieces start to the plan starts to illuminate itself, you know. As we're going through the process, you know, community groups were brought in and they were made promises, and rumors started coming back in the last little while that you know, some of those promises that were made are being told, well, we don't have enough money to do what we told you we're gonna do. And it's sort of like, well, we were saying that from the start. However, now you're realizing that it might not be the promises that you were given.

SPEAKER_01:

And as far as I keep saying, and you keep saying, if it's not in writing, yeah, well, and if they are not the ones who said it, if you said it and everyone just smiled.

SPEAKER_00:

Look, I wrote a whole piece on this, and if you really want to go back and read it, it's the it's from the point of view of being the one who's you know had this happen to them. And I think we've all been there in pieces and parts in our lives, so except I don't think many of us have been in the position where we're influencing the outcome of a$10 billion real uh real estate deal. So having said all that, so 782 is kind of like this creation that we're gonna use to rebuild Altadina, it's gonna do it under a separate authority. The problem with 782, as I said from the start, is there is no veto, there is no protest feature. There is no way to say, oh, what you're proposing here is gonna hose my community, I need to stop it. And the reason this didn't make sense to me, it I was against it because I would say it was counterintuitive because the existing legislation, which could do everything that 782 could, already had that protest feature built in. Why do they write something that's never been done before and write the legislation to be the way it is and remove the protest feature? Lady.

SPEAKER_01:

Exactly. So, you know, the the way that we keep uh framing this in our group, again, for folks who are not necessarily policy savvy, who aren't talking CRA, CRD, you don't even know that's an equality. All you need to say is what, right? Um in their everyday day uh life and language as as is Steve's existence and and to some degree has become mine, getting an education I didn't expect. Is that ultimately this has us financing our own recovery. Yeah. And and that that's the part I really want people to fully understand. Are two key pieces, there are three key pieces really. One, this increases property taxes. There's actually way more than three. I like that.

SPEAKER_00:

It doesn't increase property taxes per se.

SPEAKER_01:

It gives the ability to increase property taxes.

SPEAKER_00:

So it's an indirect property tax increase.

SPEAKER_01:

And those dollars are then used to those dollars are used to to pay the rebuild. Yes. We're effectively paying for our own recovery. Correct. It is exactly like the$22 billion wildfire insurance fund that we have all paid into, and now, you know, we better get a piece of because we're gonna need it. Um, but should it even exist? That was a topic of one of our past episodes. But so for for our purposes, you know, for I it's important for people to understand that and to understand, you know, as Steve just laid out, that Al Tedena had no say in this. There was no vote, there was no community conversation, none of that. And then this was passed, not just passed without any of our input, but passed behind closed doors, which makes you wonder. Except well, well, the input was, you know, was Serena and I, yeah, you know, testifying in Sacramento, which um rather ironically, my testimony was attributed by Chat GPT to a man. Even AI wants to attribute a woman's words to a man. But even that is, I digress, I digress, but that was amusing. AI. Who I know who wrote the program. Um, but you know, again, it's really important for people to understand that piece, that it has this, and that it really gives county, county that's done such a great job being a steward of our dollars.

SPEAKER_00:

Go back to our previous episode.

SPEAKER_01:

Correct. Even more unchecked power.

SPEAKER_00:

It absolutely unchecked power, and that's the whole thing. Like, you know, if you were doing this in, say, Alhambra, where Sasha Perez's home is, the town council, you know, you have a city council that's involved here. And if they're not doing the right thing, they're not, you know, you could say they get voted out. They're not doing the right thing here. We can't vote out the supervisor. They don't account. Yes, they're accountable to Al Tadina, but they're not really accountable. I mean, let's be honest.

SPEAKER_01:

It it goes back to that whole thing of us being part of the fifth district, which is more than 60 towns and communities, more than two million people with one representative, and that even when it is time to vote for that representative, we are what 15% of the vote? It it's an obscenely small bit of the vote that we we comprise.

SPEAKER_00:

We're for 40,000 out of uh over a million or over two million. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01:

So that's it's it's a it's a very small percentage.

SPEAKER_00:

And we're smaller now because let's be honest, Al Tadena is going to shrink as a population in the near term while we go through the rebuild. So we have even less control over or less influence over the outcomes.

SPEAKER_01:

Exactly. So it's I I just wanted to add because it's been so fascinating to me that every time this comes up, someone from our group will write me and say, So what do we do? Do we get to do we vote on are we getting out the vote on this on in November? And I'm like, no, folks, there there is no vote. This has already happened without us. Like this is like you're all just catching up. It's already passed. It's sitting on the governor's desk.

SPEAKER_00:

The only way to stop it is to make the governor feel the pain.

SPEAKER_01:

Yep. And how do you do that?

SPEAKER_00:

You make as much noise as humanly possible. At this point, honestly, it's it's rising up. And you know, what the governor effectively, what this bill effectively does in a couple of years is it gentrifies the town. And again, gentrification is going to occur in some form of fashion. Right. And it's not necessarily it's it's that we don't have a say in how that gentrification happens. And I think that that's the key point. Look, here's the other thing the the community district can assess us a fee when they run short of the money that they need to do the rebuild because of the way that they're structured, and that everybody who's involved with this knows that they're going to be short the money they're going to use it for to do uh infrastructure. And if they do that, we don't I don't, I'm not sure we even have a say in that, too. Because we the once the financing plan is approved, there's no more community accountability. Sure, every four years there's a new person appointed to a board. Maybe that becomes more accountable, maybe not. But I mean, this is California, folks. How many times have you ever seen the government want to be accountable to the population? I mean, I I'm not saying this to be a cynic, I'm just saying this is reality.

SPEAKER_01:

It is exactly. That's what I say all the time. Uh it's I'm quick to call myself a cynic, but no, it's not a Republican talking point. It is not. It's not. I mean, that is what we get into so often is that so much of this is not it's absolutely political, but it is not fall on party lines. This is just um This is just human beings. This is just policy. It's what's happening and and what we have to work with and have to figure out how to battle. I want to add because I think it's really important. Please go back to our past episode on um 782 that also talks about 797, because you know, ultimately we do have to refinance a recovery. And so the answer is not just oh, kill this, and then we have nothing. You know, there there are alternatives, and we're not gonna delve into them because we are gonna stick to our 30-minute uh time frame today, and we are still need to talk about SB9 and our CSDs, and we might even dabble with AB238 and AB679 because people really want to hear about those too. So we may get some quickies in. But um, I again I think the biggest takeaway per what I've said in the last episode as well is that do not forget that we have the power. And the bottom line is this is sitting on the governor's desk. We have the ability to get him to at least uh set it aside to just let it be. Well, they can he can veto it.

SPEAKER_00:

He can veto it, or he can just let it sit. No, no, no, no, no. He if he lets it sit, it passes. He has to veto it.

SPEAKER_01:

So he has to veto it.

SPEAKER_00:

So what you do is you call the governor's office and you ask him to veto and as soon as possible. Like, let's be honest, folks. It's now it's now or never. This thing goes through on either the 13th, 14th, or 16th, depending on the various information that I've gotten, but I would say bet it on the 13th.

SPEAKER_01:

We have a week. So we have a week to let the governor know how we feel about this legal. And look what you're able to do with hours. Yep, we have a week to let the governor know how we feel about this legislation. So if if folks can um take a minute, call or write. When I say write, you can send an email. Email is is a letter these days, and let the governor know in no uncertain terms that Altadena did not ask for this, has had no input in this, and this is not how what we want to do here. We don't we don't want this. We don't need gentrification in Altadena.

SPEAKER_00:

We don't need to finance our pay for our own recovery. If we're gonna gentrify, we want to do it where we have a some control. We don't have any sales.

SPEAKER_01:

And we have none here. And why on earth are we gonna give more power to the county that has done again such a such a great bang up job for us? I wanted to say something else, but I won't because I know that there are young years listening today.

SPEAKER_00:

Um so you can go on to your other one.

SPEAKER_01:

So, yeah, well, when you say when we go on to the other one, I think it's important to, in the same breath as we talk about 782, talk about SB9. And, you know, for those who are not familiar, um, SB9 is not new. This is not new to the fire. SB9's been around a while. It's also called the California Home Act. Um, and the key provisions there were to allow for more density. All right, so if if 782 is a gentrification piece, SB9 is the densification piece. It allows lot splitting, it allows two units per lot, um, allowing allowing up to two single-family residences on a single lot. And if you were to split, that means potentially four units total or two on each lot. And that is very relevant for Altadina because we have such large lots compared to the rest of LA City. Um, it also, and this is what becomes really kind of key for us, relaxes or completely overrides local development standards, things that include setbacks, parking, et cetera, and their and and height requirements. And I bring this up because this has been going on for a while. When SB9 was passed, local jurisdictions, including LA County, were given the opportunity to get an exemption by providing an alternate plan. Altadena has a CSD. What is a CSD? It's a community standards district that governs what development looks like both in retail, commercial, and also residential areas that it covers things like parking requirements, setbacks, height limits, even vegetation, right? So um, and and what kind of trees get put or how trees are placed and landscaping is placed, for example, in our um our commercial corridors. Stuff that's actually good, that our land use committee um, along with the county, spent many years doing years and years on this, only to pass it and then let it die so that we could have SB9 instead, because that is prop is developer-friendly, and our politicians are in bed with our developers, make no mistake about that. We'll talk about how many of our lots have sold to developers in another episode. It's not insignificant. Um, and with that, you know, we end up getting something that we didn't ask for. Now, if you were paying attention, just a couple of days after the fire, um Newsome, our governor, signed an executive order allowing for the suspension of SB9 in any fire-impacted areas, which obviously included the Palisades and us in Altadina. Um Lindsay Horvath, the Board of Supervisors uh rep, who, the supervisor who oversees the Palisades, immediately took advantage of that.

SPEAKER_00:

So did the mayor.

SPEAKER_01:

Yep, and so did LA City Mayor and exempted those communities from SB9 so that redevelopment and rebuilding would maintain the character of their communities. We were told that the same would happen for us, and I say that because I was at the meeting with the county and with all of the officials just days after the fire that was in the PCC auditorium. I'm sure many people remember that. We were all there together. Um, and we were told when it was shared that this this uh executive order was signed that SB9 would be suspended. It was the same time we were told there would be no permit fees and permits would be expedited and everything was gonna happen fast and wonderfully. And yep, and all these all the promises that have been broken so far. All of those promises that have been broken. And um guess what? Barker did not exempt uh us from SB9, even though we had the option of that. So, what does it mean? It means that homes that already had been in homes, ADUs, additions, etc., that had already managed to pass um in the last few years, that SB9 has been applied and overridden our CSD, which a lot of community members have been fighting over because you know it's the kind of thing that brought two-story ADUs right up to a fence line in a backyard for a lot of people.

SPEAKER_00:

Which are really good in a wildfire situation.

SPEAKER_01:

Which are, yeah, exactly. Uh let's not don't even get me started. Um, that's actually if you were to consult anything on um on problems with and critical challenges of increased housing density, it is literally fire hazard zone limitations. I I cannot, I have no words.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, I wonder how that is that six ASB629 or whatever is gonna affect. You can have a house up against a property line, but you can't have a tree in front of your house.

SPEAKER_01:

God forbid if it's a bogin via. God forbid. Bogan Via is gonna take out the town again, had nothing to do with no water or fire response. It was the Bogan Bia. I digress. So, you know, we we are here facing down these two things. So the bot the takeaway is that when you go to write the governor or call the governor, you want to let them know it's not just 782, it's also SB9. Right, but we need our promises kept.

SPEAKER_00:

Here's the other thing the incentives all line up for SB 780 or SB 782 to want to densify, to want to increase the property values. Because if you put four homes on a lot, now you're gonna get four pieces of property tax, and that property value underlying is gonna be much more valuable than it was before. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_01:

So if the more money in the county coffers because we're not putting enough money in the county coffers.

SPEAKER_00:

If the property tax, because that's how they're gonna rebuild Al Tadena, at least that's the way it's set up. But if you take away the primary driver of that initiative, i.e. 782, then maybe there's more flexibility for SB9. Maybe we pay attention and they go, well, you know what, land use should be local and they should have, you know, a say in this. Why does the Palais say, you know, this goes back to Micah Madrid standing in front of a meeting that I was in, and Micah Madrid is a is a political observer for those who don't know what he is. And he was standing in front and saying, you know, all the attention went to the Palisades. This was in April. And he said, and I was he was looking right at me when he said this, because he knew I was from Altina, and he's in this room with people from across the state, and he said, Why is the Palisades getting all this attention? Why is the Palisades getting all the exemptions? At some point, Al Tedina's gonna stand up, and at some point it's gonna make it very clear that the problems that we're experiencing right now in California are encapsulated in Altadena, and encapsulated in my mind, not his, in 782. And in this kind of layering on of incentives that, you know, we look back, this is the kind of stuff that you read about and watch movies about. Like this is the they took my family's house because they, you know, did this stuff in the dark of night. Here's the thing, folks. You're being told what's happening. This is not being done in the dark of night. It's you have us telling you, have been telling you for months now. You gotta stop it. And if you don't this is it, it's a 12th hour. This is it. This is the last minute. It's not any other time.

SPEAKER_01:

That is it is a literal last stand. We uh cannot underestimate that we have literally a week or less to do this.

SPEAKER_00:

Because the incentives are lining up the other way. And again, we can get into the assessor's office and how they're looking, how they're being non-specific about how they're going to reassess the properties. We could talk about SB9, how they're bringing density. We could talk about how we're getting a climate resilience district for that's a nice way of putting we're gonna tax increase the tax value of Al Tadena. There, these things are lining up against us to push everything the direction that the community was promised it wouldn't go.

SPEAKER_01:

And that is that our rebuild will look nothing like the town we lost.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, not even remotely. We understand that there's gonna be change.

SPEAKER_01:

Absolutely, nothing can remain the same.

SPEAKER_00:

But it doesn't mean it has to, we we have to just lie down and let them do whatever they want to do. We need to have a voice. And they took away that voice, they took away that vote, they took away that protest. That's what's so galling about this.

SPEAKER_01:

I want to add to, you know, uh, as I think it's really important to say that um we all understand, or at least I can speak for myself, the need for some densification, the need for more housing, the need, you know, for for all of these things, which is why, you know, in our CSD and what they we've we've already passed and approved multiple projects um that are mixed use, that increase housing density in Altadena, but in an intelligent way that's appropriate for our neighborhood and our community. Because guess what? We are a high fire fire hazard zone. No shit. Look what just happened. Sorry, sorry, Goldberg. We we're sorry, Goldman. We also, you know, uh have not enough water. We have all these water fiefdoms, and that is a whole other battle that is being fought, and that is a whole other conversation with Las Flores, Rubio Canyon, all these little family-owned companies that have overlaying districts who don't want to play together and unify because they all want to control their piece of the pie and keep their money in their coffers. And, you know, uh, we don't we don't have resources for we don't have resources for the 40 plus thousand people we have now. How are we gonna have it for 50? For a town of 43,000 people. Yeah, and where is it gonna happen if we increase the density by splitting lots, creating more multifamily, etc. Uh LA needs housing solutions. Al Dadena's tragedy is not it. But we are not your solution.

SPEAKER_00:

Housing is a whole different level of things, and you know, I can go on and on and on about that one, but that's a whole nother problem.

SPEAKER_01:

Well, they're sure as hell not putting it the Palisades, right? It's a tale of two, it's a tale of two fires.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, and it always was.

SPEAKER_01:

And it always was. All right, so Steve, before we wrap up, and I know we're pushing against our 30 limit, 30-minute limit, um, our self-imposed 30-minute limit.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, we just want to make it easy on everybody.

SPEAKER_01:

Can you give us a quick and dirty on AB679, the zone zero defensible space and the fire maps? And I say quick and dirty because this people are really worked up about this. I'm seeing a lot of upset in the groups asking what what are we doing for pushback? How are we lining up against this? This is another thing we didn't ask for and nobody wants.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, I mean, look, I as I understand it from the discussions I've had and from what I can read, it's it's a

SPEAKER_01:

It's a good thing you give it a quickie on what it is?

SPEAKER_00:

It's a bill to create defensible space and kind of define what defensible space is for high-risk wildfire zones. And it's it's a bill that is it's a bill to create a bill. I mean, you know, we talk about bureaucracies having meetings to have a meeting. It's a bill to have a bill. Like it's not a final bill per se, at least from what I'm seeing. Here's the thing, folks: insurance companies do not rely on a California definition of high fire risk areas. They have their own models. And whether the can the state dign desi deigns an area high risk or not, really doesn't affect the insurance company is going to deny you or insure you at a higher rate based upon their own models that they have. So I mean, I understand the difficulty here, but I think it's also, or the concern here, I think it's also something that if we really want to address this issue, this is a broader insurance issue.

SPEAKER_01:

It is, and but I think the part that people are probably uh reacting to also beyond the insurance uh potential for insurance implications is that people would be required to meet these higher and stricter defensible space rules, right? So as it is, you know, um anyone who is now designated as high fire risk has to build back um to what they call, you know, ignition resistance standard or aka California, you know, it's chapter seven A requirements, right? And and I've said this before, and I'll say it again. I had made nearly every chapter 7A suggestion to my hundred-year-old home when I did my renovation update. Guess what? There's no such thing as fireproof, none of it matters. All the trees in the world don't matter. The defensible space, the pea gravel, the gutters, the roof, the new windows, the doors, the eaves, let me go on and on. If there's no water and no one even tries to stop the fire. I I'm never gonna stop saying that because it's the fucking truth. But um the the issue for people, again, it's like we're gonna want to bri blame the trees in the Bogan Villa. When the trees look at the saved everybody's homes.

SPEAKER_00:

I mean, diodors are dropped.

SPEAKER_01:

Look at Christmas Tree Lane. If you look at any of the areas where homes were saved or even individual homes that survived, you cannot help but notice all of the trees surrounding them, often too close, or what is considered too close in these terms. And again, this goes back with SB9. Tell help me understand how more densification helps us with fire resistance. Oh, that's right, it doesn't. Make it make sense.

SPEAKER_00:

Again, I think yeah, I I think this is a discussion that's going to continue. I I think there's a lot of what we call cleanup bills that have to be done probably in the next session. Unfortunately, we're gonna have, as I've said before, a very limited window in which to you know, the number of bills that are going to be available. So we're gonna have to figure out how to have multi-impact bills, impact bills in a single bill. In other words, like if we're going to clean up insurance in defensible spaces, that would have to be under an insurance bill or a defensible space bill, and we'd kill two birds with one stone type thing.

SPEAKER_01:

And and I think it's, you know, again, I don't want to push our time too much, but it's also worth noting that this issue of, you know, the zone zero rules, the five foot ember buffer for structures in the high fire zone, again, it's it's this issue of you know, redu like uh have people being able to have virtually no v vegetation, the no bogumbia on your how on your structures, no any climbing plants of any kind on your structures, no trees within five feet, etc. Um that has already been pushed through a 2025 executive this year, an executive order. So separate of this.

SPEAKER_00:

It's already happening.

SPEAKER_01:

It's already happening, and um we're gonna have to figure out how we're all going to navigate that whole new world of um I I hate to say it, but it is like that it's boomerang legislation. It's like, oops, we fucked up. So now let's create a bunch of nonsense that makes it feel better. Like, oh, we're fixing it, we're fixing it, we're fixing it, when all we're doing is creating more new problems.

SPEAKER_00:

I think Governor Brown said it best when he was governor. He says, not every problem needs a bill.

SPEAKER_01:

Amen. That's a good spot to land. I think Steve's gonna bring it home with a small business show.

SPEAKER_00:

I got a shout out because uh I've been talking about it and I haven't uh given a shout-out to Smoking Con. Uh, for those of you that drink the uh dried citrus or the uh smoked citrus that you get over at um Alta Bev, it's they're actually an Altadena uh small business. Well, they were his the house was lost, unfortunately. But he had his little you know, world headquarters in the back, and you know, it's uh CR Citrus. If great addition to tequila andor bourbon or whiskey drinks, and they're uh fantastic. And you can get them over at AltaBev and or online at CR Citrus.com.

SPEAKER_01:

I love that, and I love that um and his t-shirts.

SPEAKER_00:

He you can get all the swag you want, he won't be undersold, it's all free. And uh it always says the fruit abides. So for those of you that wear those t-shirts or see those hats, it's that's uh that's Dan Hare in CR Citrus.

SPEAKER_01:

I haven't seen it and I love it. And um, I believe that Dan was neighbors to uh friends of mine who I know are also listeners. So shout out to Brian and Lisa.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, you don't have to read it misses you. You don't have to read my Substacks to get the information.

SPEAKER_01:

Um I want to wrap us up uh because I realize in our lapis uh last episode we were hustling through and we didn't do our full wrap-up. Um I'm Shauna Dawson Beer. I'm Beautiful Altadina. You can find me on social media, including Instagram, um, Substack, Facebook at Beautiful Altadena. And I am joined by Stephen Sachs, who we call Steve Sacks. Steve is Alta Policy Walk. You can also find Steve and I, Beautiful Aldina, on Substack.

SPEAKER_00:

Yep, at well, Alta Policy Walk on Substack. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01:

And if you've got any questions, um you can always email us or hit us up in our DMs or through our Substacks. But if you want to D email us, we are beautiful Altadina OG as an official group, beautiful Altadina OG at gmail.com. And if there's things that you want covered or want to talk about that you don't think we've hit, let us know. We want to hear from you.

SPEAKER_00:

Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_01:

We'll talk to you next time.

SPEAKER_00:

Bye now.