It was a classic showdown at City Hall: On one side, demolition-inclined developers; on the other, preservation-dedicated activists. At issue? Mayor Hales’ proposed $25,000 demolition tax, aimed especially at developers who tear down viable homes to profit from construction of million-dollar replacements, often triple in size of the ones destroyed. Questions in controversy? Neighborhood livability and demo tax fairness.
A guest panel was invited by Mayor Hales to testify in support of the proposed ordinance. His choice of guests? Four representatives from none other than Beaumont-Wilshire’s home-grown United Neighborhoods for Reform (UNR), the preservationist movement whose Demolition-Development Resolution has united 43 neighborhood associations representing nearly half the City’s residents in pushing for building code revision to preserve affordable housing, cut down on residential demolitions, address safety and health concerns associated with demolitions, and place compatibility limits on the size and footprint of replacement homes. The invitation to lead off testimony at a Council meeting was a first for UNR and icing on the cake for a grassroots organization that only a couple years ago was completely off City Hall’s radar. Additionally, earlier in 2015, the Bureau of Development Services (BDS) extended an invitation to UNR to be represented on the BDS Demolition Subcommittee, a body charged with making policy recommendations to the full Development Review Advisory Committee (DRAC) regarding issues of demolition oversight and demolition delay procedure.
But back to the Council hearing. Anticipating opponents’ points, UNR preemptively rebutted with counterpoints:
Point: $25,000 tax will be added to price of new house, thus decreasing affordability. Counterpoint: Affordability is not make-or-break for buyers of million-dollar homes.
Point: One-size-fits-all approach ignores value and condition of house demolished. Counterpoint: Most demolitions are of homes viable and attractive to entry buyers.
Point: It’s a NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) tax appealing to self-serving residents who oppose progress. Counterpoint: Replacing established homes with incompatible giants isn’t progress.
Point: Demolishing or preserving a home is the owner’s business, not the City’s. Counterpoint: Curbing demolitions is tantamount to protecting residents’ health.
UNR also voiced support for a demolition moratorium pending full implementation of a new state law (SB705) that makes asbestos surveys at residential demolition sites mandatory. But that idea would have to wait, because it was already November 25th, and the goal was to have a tax vote the following week.
But the vote never happened—not because it wasn’t on the Council docket the following Wednesday, but because Mayor Hales knew in advance that he had fallen one vote short of a majority (Commissioners Fritz, Novick, and Fish voting no). The Mayor then announced that he would go back to the drawing board and submit a revised demolition tax proposal to the Council in mid-January. But less than a week before Christmas, Mayor Hales made the surprise decision to abandon the idea of a demolition tax altogether, and UNR followed suit…albeit reluctantly.