The Herald's View

Housing needs not addressed

Posted June 5, 2007

Today's special election in Monterey County will make important decisions on a number of important land-use issues. Blessedly, it
 will put a pause to the tremendously contentious Measure A/GPU4 campaigns. But there is something the vote will not do. It won't
begin to fix the county's extreme shortage of affordable housing.

Lack of affordable housing will continue to be a crisis needing immediate and real attention, not the lip service of a political campaign.

Some will say that we should wait and see how the election results shake out over the next few years.

That would be such a mistake. No matter what you heard or think you heard from the campaigns, the LandWatch slow-growth plan or the county's faster-growth GPU4 plan would mainly tweak the status quo when it comes to creating affordable housing.

The campaign debate has mainly been about fine points, such as how long "inclusionary units" should remain affordable and the size of projects requiring special set-aside payments. It wasn't about creating specific projects or creating homes or apartments the working poor can afford. Measure A or the competing Measure C would do almost nothing to plan or encourage any new affordable homes. They would do almost nothing to identify locations for reduced-rent apartments. They don't identify any new subsidy sources.

In terms of numbers, GPU4, the general plan approved by the county Board of Supervisors, would likely create more affordable housing because it allows more market-rate housing.

Unfortunately, for those coping with inadequate, overly expensive or overly distant housing, the county's primary approach to the problem is to require developers of new subdivisions to set aside a relatively small percentage of their projects for affordable housing. Generally, that translates to a limited amount of homes being sold to middle-class wage earners. Neither Measure A nor GPU4 changes that.

Rather than continue creating formulas that tie the number of reduced-price units to the overall number of units in large developments, we need to look harder for other opportunities. We need to find vacant lots in urbanized areas where we can build fully affordable apartments. We need employers and government agencies to form partnerships to create worker housing. We need for existing neighborhoods to be more accepting of higher density developments. We need to do a lot more than wait and see. We need to realize it isn't someone else's problem.

Some feel it is fantasy to think there ever could be an ample supply of truly affordable housing in a resort area. That may be true. But even if it is, we should view it is a challenge to find new approaches, large and small, and not an excuse to continue doing so little.

The Herald recommends

Measure A: Slow-growth general plan is too rigid. NO

Measure B: Would overturn county's less-restrictive general plan. NO

Measure C: Adopts county's plan, GPU4. YES

Measure D: Ratifies Butterfly Village project. NO