San Mateo County supervisors are getting cold feet over a ballot measure that would fast-track government-funded housing projects but reduce public scrutiny of those development proposals.
The supervisors were planning to vote to put the measure on the ballot today. But County Manager Mike Callegy has decided instead to hold a discussion of the idea but no vote.
That means it’s unlikely the board will have enough time to get the question on the ballot for November.
Two of the five supervisors — Ray Mueller and David Canepa — came out against putting the question on the November ballot. And a number of cities either opposed the idea or said they needed more time to study it before offering an opinion.
The county wants to bypass Article 34 of the California constitution, which says that government-funded housing projects need to be approved at the polls. The county wanted voters in November to waive their right to approve each project. If voters approved the county’s ballot question, Article 34 elections would no longer be necessary before the county builds a project.
Proponents say it will allow for more low-income housing projects, but opponents fear it will make it easier for the county to put large housing developments in residential neighborhoods over the objections of homeowners.
The proposed ballot question has moved through the county process at unusually rapid pace, and a number of cities say they need more time to study it.
“I’m very concerned at how little time there has been for cities to understand this proposed measure,” Redwood City Manager Melissa Stevenson Diaz wrote in a memo to the county board. “The measure does not propose to distribute units across the county and, since a city has no control over another agency developing or converting housing within their borders, there is nothing to prevent some communities from ultimately being required to host much more affordable housing than others.”
The cities of Half Moon Bay and Millbrae came out against putting the question to voters.
“This ballot measure discussion is not over. It has just begun,” Supervisor Noelia Corzo wrote in a memo to the board.
Corzo, who favors putting the Article 34 bypass on the ballot, said that with more time, the county will be able to convince city leaders to get behind a ballot measure in a future election.
Glad this idea is being tossed in the waste basket. Voters deserve a say over every public housing project. Giving the county a blanket approval, without a list of projects it would apply to, is nuts. Glad it’s dying.
It’s time for supervisors to replace Mike Callegy.
He no longer represents the will of the board.
It was sleazy for the county to rush this ballot measure through without a robust public discussion. And I can’t believe they wanted us to surrender our rights to vote on future projects. I think we ought to recall Noelia Corzo for her role in this fiasco. Bravo to Ray Mueller and Dave Canepa for calling this out.
Democracy and transparency take time to develop thoughtfully, not speedily. Thanks to Supervisors Mueller and Canepa for stopping this steamroller.
We should repeal Article 34. California has a housing crisis. One part of the solution is for the government to fund and build more public housing. We don’t have referenda on whether to build a shopping mall or a mansion or new freeway lane. Nor should we have a referendum on whether to build public housing. Until the state repeals Article 34, this kind of county-level solution makes sense.
I’ll bet you would change your tune if they wanted to put a stack-and-pack housing project next to your home. Article 34 protects homeowners from YIMBYs, Sacramento Democrats and politically-connected developers. Leave Article 34 alone!
Yes, I want to vote on it!! No politician is going to take that away!! I like to keep an eye on the public housing, specially who is moving in!! Country of origin, immigration status….