Dear Marin County Board of Supervisors:
First, thank you for fulfilling all of the unrelenting and time consuming demands of the HCD to create such a complete Housing Element document. As we have all seen (in Santa Monica, builder’s remedy) there are severe consequences for non-certification, and I’m grateful for the certifiable quality of the 700+ pages of the Marin County Housing Element.
Tom Lai was, unfortunately, correct when he said the RHNA would make hazard areas “unavoidable,” at one of the first Housing Element meetings I attended.
Looking at the Housing Element in it’s most current revision, I see more development sited in areas of sea level rise in Tam Valley. I see more housing required even on Bayhills Rd in Santa Venetia, where there is not even an evacuation line to North San Pedro Rd on the MWPA evacuation map; there is only a purple squiggle that presumably runs up the hill to no exit at all.
I have been through the County Housing Element many times, and I am struck by the amount of information that the state requires, but then makes no allowances for. This reporting will increase when AB 1445 takes effect in 2025 and requires a SLR element-type report, which still will not affect RHNA.
These reports, especially the Safety Element, should serve as guidelines for reasonable growth and density. But the state of California has a one size fits all RHNA, and it is going to hurt Marin County.
Our housing crisis is in the lower-income areas, not market rate housing. Low-income housing should be not be addressed as for-profit gaming of small percentages into market rate developments.
Times have changed, and the RHNA system needs change.
Market rate housing needs to be removed from the equation. The new housing laws are all incentive bonuses for development of incredibly profitable housing on one hand, and harsh, punitive measures for cities and counties on the other. These punishments live on after the Housing Element, in the hands of private developers. If “WE” fail to make progress towards our assigned affordable housing goals, SB 35 / 330 projects become unavoidable, and localities are all being set up to fail.
Serious housing policy should be undertaken on a state level, with subsidized housing developed in conjunction with cities, as in the redevelopment agencies of the past.
Homelessness is now conflated with lack of housing, but homelessness is a statewide, not regional issue, though it affects some regions more than others. Addressing homelessness requires statewide solutions. Instead our Governor plays an odd game of punishment by withholding funds, not offering guidance.
We rely on our elected officials to defend local control from state overreach, especially when the state is not taking critical issues into account. Plan Bay Area 2050 specifically excluded hazard areas from development, but the HCD has overruled that bit of common sense, and all appeals, even the County’s own, were denied.
I note that the Housing Element creation dollar-cost to the County has been quite high, certainly over $2 million when legal fees and in-house hours are incorporated.
The cost for taking a stand against state overreach is about $25,000 in the case of the SB 9 lawsuit.
We all know how shocking the sixth cycle RHNA numbers were. How could 140 units go to 3,569? The numbers have already failed a state audit based on methodology. There is no remedy offered besides an HCD/RHNA lawsuit based on the audit results; no other HCD oversight is available.
After the Housing Element is certified, I urge the County to contact attorney Pam Lee plee@awattorneys.com and explore the legal merits and bases of the SB 9 and HCD/RHNA lawsuits, on behalf of the citizens in the unincorporated areas you represent.
Sincerely,
AmyKalish
Director, Citizen Marin
citizenmarin.org