This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Hillsborough Menlo Park Millbrae Pacifica Portola Valley Redwood City San Bruno San Carlos San Mateo San Mateo County South San Francisco Woodside
San Mateo County
Sub-Regional Housing Needs Allocation Process Policy Advisory Committee Meeting & Public Hearing
Thursday, February 22, 2007
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Members attending: Judith Christensen (Daly City), Bonnie McClung (Half Moon Bay), Pam Frisella (Foster City) , Tom Davids (San Carlos), Michael Barnes (Brisbane), Tom Kasten (Hillsborough), Barbara Pierce (Redwood City), Irene O’Connell (San Bruno), Deborah Gordon (Woodside), Karyl Matsumoto (South San Francisco), Julie Lancelle (Pacifica), James Janz (Atherton) Public Comment 1. William Byron Webster – East Palo Alto (EPA), Sr. Member EPA Rent Stabilization Board a. DOF Population Estimate 1/06 - Persons per household - 4.019 EPA highest in Bay Area b. Types of Housing - strong emphasis on MF housing mobile home parks important and should be preserved. c. Allocation for very low and low 39% Above moderate - 42% Need to do more for very low/low/extremely low 2. Robert Owen - EPA Need more for extremely low Concern about law suits on rent control. Concern about getting priced out of low-income market. Would like accountability for maintaining low/very low-income housing. Cort Skinner - EPA Should take into account what was built to see how cities are doing. How much land/capacity is available for each city? Wilbert Lee - EPA - Housing Director Mayor David Woods had planned on attending. Doesn’t take into consideration production level from last cycle. Did 60%. Only non-profits can do rental housing.
20% requirement on inclusionary zoning. BMR. Problems getting the very low income. See if the numbers are achievable by each city. Take into account what was achieved last cycle. 5. Andrea Ouse - Planner Colma Concerned about near transit factor in ABAG formula. Difficult to provide housing near transit, but got a higher number. Not possible to get the higher number. She proposed a careful consideration of the ABAG formula adopted. Greg Lashane - Housing Leadership Council Support for general concept of regional cooperation Want to keep income proportionality in any trade. 7. Andrea - Housing Leadership Council Board Member Support effort. Incentivize rentals. With transfers - subsidy should also transfer. Consider geography so as not too cluster low-income housing in a few cities. Committee Comments Member Davids – Possible to adopt a higher level percentage for the income levels? Is there reality on the income levels? Member Gordon - Reminding us that we are breaking ground and trying to put this thing together. Appreciates the public input provided today. Member Christensen – What’s the benefit of a sub-region? As per Marisa Cravens from ABAG – Current penalty is that you are less eligible for state funding for cities that have housing elements that are not in compliance. Cities are more open to lawsuits if you do not have an approved housing element. In the future there may be a closer tie in with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) funds and housing production. Member Barnes – Bring back to TAC that the cities that may not build housing should start with higher numbers. Member Matsumoto – Will the burden of low-income housing be distributed equally? Member Gordon – The old way was to get as low a number as possible, now we can try meet the housing need and meet the housing shortage. Member Pierce – We are identifying sites where housing could be built. We need to see if we all believe in the basic premise that we should be providing additional housing. We should create a chart to show what it would mean for each jurisdiction as to what the income level numbers would be. Member Christensen - Where are the other cities on the PAC? Staff should be more careful with the comments that they make in relation to what they can or are willing to do. As per Bob Beyer (RHNA TAC Chair) – The TAC is now beyond what member Christensen said and are moving towards consensus.
Member Lancelle – make sure that the other cities show. Currently the number is not the real number. As we talk about the real number we will then be able to collaborate and work on affordable housing. Member Janz – (as an agenda item for next time) Each city should bring out what their constraints/concerns/issues are so that we can get to the solution for our County (trading etc.). As per Marisa Craves from ABAG the big number for the County from ABAG should be available on May 17, 2007.