Marin housing mandate opponents map resistancestrategy
A crew works on a
townhome development on Redwood Boulevard near Wood Hollow Drive in Novato on
Wednesday, Aug. 11, 2021. (Alan Dep/Marin Independent Journal)
By RICHARD
HALSTEAD | rhalstead@marinij.com |
Marin Independent Journal
PUBLISHED: February 14, 2022 at 6:43
p.m. | UPDATED: February 14, 2022 at 7:15 p.m.
A
core group of Marin’s staunchest density opponents is strategizing ways to
challenge state housing mandates.
Catalysts
for Local Control, founded by Mill Valley resident Susan Kirsch, held a
teleconference meeting attended by about 36 people on Thursday. The statewide
organization’s stated mission is to promote “affordable housing while
preserving single-family zoning, the environment and reliable infrastructure.”
Featured
speakers included Sharon Rushton of Mill Valley, chairperson of Sustainable
TamAlmonte; Frank Egger, the seven–time mayor of Fairfax known for his battles
with developers; and Stephen Nestel, a community activist from Marinwood.
Kirsch
said that Marin City Community Services District chairman Damian Morgan was set
to speak but was unable to attend.
The
purpose of the meeting was to discuss ways of pushing back against an edict
from the Association of Bay Area Governments requiring Marin County and its
municipalities to create 14,405 new residences between 2023 and 2031.
“This
is more than the current number of homes in Mill Valley and Sausalito
combined,” Rushton said.
During
the previous cycle from 2015 to 2023, Marin jurisdictions were assigned a 2,298
residences.
Every
eight years, the state Department of Housing and Community Development projects
how much new housing will be needed in the Bay Area to accommodate expected
population and job growth.
The
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) then decides how many of those homes
to assign to each county and municipality in the region. Local jurisdictions
are required to adjust zoning laws to make the creation of that amount of
housing possible.
Under
SB 35, which was signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2017, any municipality
or county that fails to build the amount of housing assigned to it by the
Association of Bay Area Governments is subject to a streamlined approval
process for new housing projects, which removes virtually all local control.
Another
new state law, Senate Bill 9, gives property owners the right to build
duplexes, and in some cases four homes, in most single-family-home neighborhoods.
New
state housing laws are already playing out in Marin. A five-story, 74-apartment
complex in Marin City was approved under a streamlined process in 2020. At last
count, the developer of the project, AMG & Associates LLC of Encino, was
working on eight projects that qualify for SB 35 protections.
“California
housing policy has been supporting Wall Street investor wealth but not
mainstream wage earners,” Kirsch said. “It is harming our neighborhoods and
communities and the American Dream.”
Kirsch
cited a study by the Palo Alto-based Embarcadero Institute as evidence that the
ABAG housing assignments are inflated. The study contends that this cycle’s
estimated need for new housing, calculated using a new approach mandated by yet
another new state law, Senate Bill 828, mistakenly double counted the actual
need.
Groups
such as California YIMBY and YIMBY Law dispute this argument, asserting that
the Embarcadero Institute’s problem with the numbers is a political one, not a
technical one.
Regardless,
Kirsch said one of the actions that members of the public should take if they
believe the housing assignments are unreasonable is to contact Assemblyman Marc
Levine, D-Greenbrae, or state Sen. Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, and demand an
audit of the housing need estimate.
Rushton
said, “These unrealistic housing allocations are setting jurisdictions up to
fail. Marin’s crisis in housing is not in quantity but in affordability.”
Ruston
asked meeting attendees for their help in gathering signatures to get the Our
Neighborhood Voices Initiative on the ballot. The proposed ballot measure would
neutralize state housing laws such as SB 9 by mandating that city and county
land-use and zoning laws override all conflicting state laws, except in certain
special circumstances.
The
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), which is the equivalent
of ABAG in Southern California, voted 32 to 12 to endorse the measure. SCAG’s
jurisdiction spans six counties — Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San
Bernardino and Ventura — and 191 cities.
Rushton
said she is also putting together a local petition to urge local government
representatives to actively resist the housing mandates.
For
example, she wants them to oppose the Marin Community Development Agency’s decision
to identify 15% to 30% more housing sites than the 3,569 it has been assigned
for the unincorporated area, as a buffer in case other sites don’t pan out.
Egger
emphasized the risk inherent in building in many areas of Marin due to the risk
of wildland fires and sea-level rise.
“Everyone
wants to blame Pacific Gas and Electric for all the fires, but local agencies
are approving development in ‘wildland urban interface’ areas,” Egger said. “If
they are forcing these units to be built in WUI zones, what is going to happen
when they burn up and when we burn up? We need to put the elected officials and
agencies on notice for the liability.”
Nestle, however, said, “The time for persuasion of the decision makers is pretty much over. We citizens need to seize the day and force our local and state officials to reconsider what they’re doing. I hate to say it. I’m the passionate one. I would be like the truckers in Canada.”
Save Marinwood Note: Despite the breathless headline that implies that we are all against housing, it is not true. We are for RESPONSIBLE community planning. It is very apparent that Marin County has not considered the full impact on infrastructure, water, schools, government services and taxes with their massive growth plans. Unlike previous Housing Elements, if we fail to have housing built, developers will get their projects approved WITHOUT ANY LOCAL PLANNING. It is absurd.
D
No comments:
Post a Comment