Most City Council hopefuls back housing measure

Candidates weigh in on hot issue of upcoming election

PALO ALTO — Candidates elected to City Council next month likely will face the same hurdles that make it difficult for city leaders to provide affordable housing: limited land, high property costs, funding and the city’s zoning code.

Yet there’s no question affordable housing is needed. Palo Alto had about 200 homeless people — a quarter of them veterans — the last time county officials counted. And the city’s average rent continues to be prohibitive for many, at $3,463 a month, according to RealFacts.

When the Palo Alto Housing Corp. announced in August a public-private partnership would turn Hotel California into 20 affordable housing units, the nonprofit’s CEO, Candice Gonzalez, noted it’s been five years since the city last acquired land for affordable housing.

The city currently has $7.9 million for such purposes, but cheap land is hard to come by and the bulk of that money was recently set aside to help preserve Buena Vista Mobile Home Park.

The majority of the 11 council candidates who are vying for four seats say they support Measure A, which was unanimously endorsed by sitting council members last week.

The $950 million bond measure on the Nov. 8 ballot would pay to house low- and moderate-income families and Santa Clara County’s vulnerable residents including seniors, veterans and those who are homeless.

Candidate Stewart Carl says he supports the measure “reluctantly,” Leonard Ely says he does so “in theory” but needs to better understand how the money would be distributed, and Danielle Martell says she would get behind it only if the housing is “offered exclusively to people with full American citizenship.”

Candidate Greer Stone said he supports the measure because it costs less to house a homeless individual than to do nothing, referring to a study that shows the county spends $520 million per year on emergency room visits, law enforcement and services to homeless people. Stone said Measure A also helps provide relief to firsttime home buyers.

“As a renter, I look forward to the day when my fiancée and I can buy our first home,” Stone said. “This measure can help others like me afford to buy their first homes.”

What are the candidates’ plans, if elected, to preserve and increase affordable housing?

All said they favor either increasing the number of below-market-rate housing mandated for each new development or requiring developers to pay higher building fees or higher in-lieu fees when they prefer to pay a fee than build lower-cost units.

Candidates Carl, Stone, Arthur Keller, Lydia Kou and John Fredrich have all mentioned raising the number of below-market-rate housing units required in new developments to about 25 percent.

The city requires housing developers to sell 15 percent of their units below market rate or pay an impact fee between 7.5 to 10 percent of the market sales price.

Stone and Fredrich want to eliminate in-lieu fees altogether while Kou proposes to increase it. Kou says she also wants to grow the city’s fund for affordable housing by increasing the amount of development impact fees that office and hotel developers pay.

Candidates Adrian Fine and Don McDougall say the city should increase development fees, though the amount needs discussion.

“Our current fees are comparable to nearby municipalities, and given Palo Alto’s desirability/profit margins for developments, we can increase fees,” Fine said in a questionnaire organized by Palo Alto Neighborhoods. “However, we should not increase fees to the point where development is no longer feasible in Palo Alto because then we will not be able to produce on-site units or collect in-lieu fees for affordable housing.”

McDougall says all ideas have to be on the table.

“If the majority of people believe housing is a serious issue, and you hear that all the time, then you can’t start with an ideology that starts with no on some things,” McDougall said.

The community should be prepared to consider cluster housing, smaller units, secondary dwelling units and buildings taller than 50 feet, McDougall said. And, she added, there’s also the potential for a sea change where “millennials have different attitudes toward owning or sharing cars in the sharing economy,” meaning housing needs to be near public transportation.