Open Letter: Surfrider, Opposing SB423 is Counterproductive
The Surfrider Foundation should support efficient & affordable housing in cities because it protects our oceans and ensures access for more Californians.
Dear Surfriders,
As an environmentalist, avid surfer, and member of the Surfrider Foundation, I deeply admire the foundation’s work in protecting the ocean and promoting access for all.
However, I am disappointed by our opposition to SB423, a bill in the California Legislature that aims to streamline the construction of affordable multi-family housing in urban areas. This bill is crucial for addressing our housing and climate crises, yet Surfrider testified against it, expressing concerns about implementation in coastal regions and the removal of the California Coastal Commission’s authority over housing development in urbanized coastal regions.
While I understand Surfrider’s good intentions, I find this opposition misguided, short-sighted, and contradictory to its mission.
First, let’s address Surfrider’s concerns about the bill. SB423 targets already developed urban areas and does not encroach upon untouched coastal habitats. While it affects urban areas within the Coastal Zone, it is important to note that the state government defines this zone as up to 5 miles inland, including portions of urban areas like Santa Monica, Venice, and San Francisco’s Outer Sunset and Outer Richmond. By opposing this bill, Surfrider inadvertently puts still-untouched coastal habitat under greater pressure for development. Blocking the efficient use of land in urban coastal areas would only shift housing development to other parts of metropolitan areas, perpetuating suburban sprawl that encroaches on wilderness, watersheds, wetlands, and pristine coastlines.
Furthermore, Surfrider’s opposition fails to recognize the positive impact that this bill could have on climate change. Denser, multi-family housing reduces greenhouse gas emissions by enabling people to live closer to their jobs, schools, and everyday amenities, thereby reducing the need for cars. It also encourages the use of efficient public transit and lowers per-capita energy consumption through improved heating and cooling systems. Moreover, denser housing in developed areas along the coast could improve climate resilience by allowing more people to live in the region’s mild temperatures. Surfrider acknowledges climate change as a significant threat to our oceans, and if we are serious about addressing it, we should embrace the more space and cost-efficient housing facilitated by SB423, even in coastal areas.
Additionally, Surfrider’s mission is to ensure “full and fair beach access for all to enjoy.” Current coastal communities in California are often exclusive, characterized by prohibitively expensive single-family homes that limit access to only wealthy and predominantly white populations. SB423 would streamline the construction of more affordable multi-family housing, opening up beaches to a broader slice of Californians. Considering the history of discriminatory housing practices that sought to impede people of color from accessing the coast, Surfrider should be an advocate for denser, more affordable housing in cost-burdened beach cities.
When I think about the potential future that a bill like SB423 could create, I am reminded of my own personal journey. My parents, both ocean lovers, met on the beautiful beaches of Los Angeles. However, shortly before I was born, the soaring costs of coastal communities forced them to move inland, away from the ocean we loved. As a result, despite being born and raised in coastal Los Angeles, the beach became an exciting yet infrequent destination that required hours of travel. Unfortunately, my story is not unique; many Angelenos share this excitement for the ocean but are unable to live close enough to have real access. That is why, among the many reasons above, I wanted to pen this letter in support of housing in our urban coastal communities.
As a member and ally, I want to reiterate my profound respect for the Surfrider Foundation, but I urge reconsidering the opposition to SB423. I also encourage my fellow Surfriders to reevaluate our perspective on housing as a tool for preserving our oceans and environment. Reflexively opposing new housing, especially when it is located away from sensitive ecosystems, hinders progress. Let’s instead champion more affordable, efficient, and equitable housing in coastal communities as a means to safeguard untouched coastal areas, combat climate change, and ensure access for more people.
With utmost respect,
Chris Tokita
Los Angeles, CA
