Narrative-first, evidence-driven

Back to playbooks

Purpose: reduce the monthly squeeze by making housing supply more predictable and faster to deliver. This is mostly about process, timelines, capacity, and rules.

The mechanism (plain language)

When it’s slow, uncertain, and expensive to build, we get less housing. Less housing means higher rents and prices. The squeeze rises, and people get easier to scare and split.

What good looks like

• predictable rules
• fast, fair timelines
• enough staff to review and inspect
• transparent metrics
• fewer “gotcha” chokepoints

Quick wins (pick 1–3, not all)

Timelines + predictability

1. Publish a permitting timeline dashboard (by project type) monthly.
2. Set service-level targets (e.g., first review within X business days) and report performance.
3. Pre-application checklists that are clear and stable (reduce resubmits).
4. Standardize conditions (avoid one-off surprises that delay).

Capacity (staffing + throughput)

5. Fund additional plan reviewers / inspectors tied to backlog reduction targets.
6. Cross-train staff so absences don’t stall reviews.
7. Add “expedite” only if it funds capacity (so it doesn’t become a pay-to-play line jump).

Rules + process simplification

8. By-right approvals for code-compliant projects (reduce discretionary delay).
9. Simplify small infill (ADUs, duplexes) with pre-approved plans and clear standards.
10. Remove duplicate reviews across departments; create one lead reviewer.
11. Limit late-stage surprises: if city misses a deadline, the clock can’t reset without cause.

Transparency + accountability

12. Publish appeal outcomes and reasons (so “delay tactics” are visible).
13. Track and publish variance/conditional use processing time.
14. Publish fees and total typical costs (so the public can see the “process tax”).

Scoreboard metrics (choose 3–5)

• Median days: application → first review
• Median days: application → approval
• Inspection backlog (days / count)
• Number of units approved per quarter
• % of applications requiring resubmittal (and why)
• Appeals filed and average delay caused
• Vacancy rate trend (if available)

Common failure modes

• “Study it” becomes a graveyard.
• Staff get blamed for capacity and policy constraints.
• Expedites create unfairness unless they fund capacity.
• Process complexity becomes a stealth anti-housing policy.

Bridge language (calm, local, nonpartisan)

• “This is a process problem, not a people problem.”
• “Slow approvals are a hidden tax we all pay every month.”
• “Let’s make rules predictable, then measure the results.”
• “If we care about affordability, we need enough homes.”

One Ask examples (copy/paste)

• “Publish monthly permitting timelines by project type starting [date] and reduce median review time by 25% within 6 months.”
• “Fund two additional inspectors in the next budget and report backlog weekly until it’s under [target].”
• “Adopt by-right approvals for code-compliant projects by [date] and track approval times publicly.”

Back to playbooks