|
|||||||
KUSP LandWatch
News |
|||||||
|
ogo.gif" width="108" height="109" border="0"> "Listen Live" |
KUSP provided a brief Land Use Report on KUSP Radio from January 2003 to May 2016. Archives of past transcripts are available here.
Week of September 13, 2004 to September 17, 2004
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP Radio by Gary Patton, Executive Director of LandWatch Monterey County. The opinions expressed by Mr. Patton are not necessarily those of KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors.
| Monday, September 13, 2004 – The Housing Element And GPU Forum #2 |
 |
|
Tomorrow night from 6:00 to 9:00, those interested in developing a “Community” General Plan Update for Monterey County will be gathering in Carmel Valley. The meeting will be the second in a series of five Community Forums. It will be held at the All Saints Episcopal Day School Gymnasium, 860 Carmel Valley Road. The Forum tomorrow will focus on the Land Use and Housing Elements, two of the most important Elements of the local General Plan. Let’s briefly discuss the Housing Element. It’s a little bit different from the other required Elements of the General Plan, because the Housing Element must be specifically reviewed by and certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. HCD, as it’s usually called, is charged with the responsibility for making sure that each California city and county is able to accommodate its “fair share” of the state’s expected population growth. Click on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org, and you’ll find a reference to the state laws governing the preparation and review of the Housing Element. It’s clear, from reviewing the law, that the state doesn’t want local communities to shortchange the need to provide new housing. Unlike other parts of the state’s General Plan law, the law setting out requirements for the Housing Element is incredibly detailed. This reflects the housing crisis that confronts the entire state of California, and not just the Central Coast. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, September 14, 2004 – See You Tonight In Carmel Valley |
|
|
Listen to what the State law says about the Housing Element that must be included in every local General Plan: “The housing element shall consist of an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing.” The Housing Element must contain an “inventory of resources and constraints,” including an “analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels….” What you may be picking up here is that the State law is deeply skeptical about the willingness of local city and county governments to provide new housing. The state is demanding that local governments provide numerical proof, with extensive documentation, that the local government is making enough land available for the housing that will be needed by persons of all income levels. Unfortunately, making land available for the development of housing doesn’t solve the problem, if the problem is to provide housing for families and individuals of “all income levels.” You’ll hear more about that tonight, at the Carmel Valley Community GPU Forum, from 6:00 to 9:00 at the All Saints Episcopal Day School Gymnasium. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, September 15, 2004 – The Housing Element, Continued |
|
|
If you attended the Monterey County Community GPU Forum last night, you had a chance to talk about both land use and housing. Most of you, though, I know weren’t there. So let me give those who weren’t just a little bit more about the Housing Element. This topic should be interesting to anyone who lives along the Central Coast, Monterey County resident or not. State law reflects a deep suspicion that local governments don’t want to provide enough opportunities for new housing, as part of their land use planning process. Is this suspicion at all well-founded? I’d have to say that the answer is all too often “yes.” There are some communities which deliberately seek to exclude housing for lower income persons. Since income levels correlate with ethnicity to a significant degree, this approach can be a kind of defacto racial segregation. While such cases exist, I don’t actually think that deliberate efforts to exclude people of color, or even people with lower incomes, is the main reason that we have a housing crisis. To the degree that local governments don’t make enough land available for housing, it’s probably because they’re thinking about the “bottom line.” Ever since Proposition 13 passed, housing doesn’t really pay for itself. Building new housing means that members of the existing community actually get fewer services on a per capita basis than before the new housing went in.For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, September 16, 2004 – Fair Share Requirements |
|
|
During the last week or so, I’ve been talking about the local General Plan, since there is such an active effort in Monterey County to develop a “Community” General Plan. Monterey County or not, though, every community has to have a General Plan, and the requirements are the same everywhere. Housing issues seem to be the same everywhere, too. There’s not enough housing that ordinary, working families can afford. The Housing Element requirements in State law seem based on the idea that local governments are the main problem, and that if local governments would just open up more land for development, and eliminate what the state law calls “governmental constraints,” our housing problems would be solved. More on that tomorrow. For today, let me identify how the state attempts to get around what they see as the unwillingness of local governments to make enough land available for housing. The State’s primary tool is what’s called the “Fair Share” requirement imposed on each city and county. The state comes up with a figure for statewide projected population growth, and then parcels that total number out to each community. No matter what the local problems (water problems, fiscal problems, school problems, the desire to protect agricultural land – whatever) the local government is supposed to accommodate the amount of growth the state says it has to. Failure to do so means penalties, and every year, there are efforts to increase the penalties more. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, September 17, 2004 – The Market and Affordable Housing |
|
|
Meeting the “Fair Share” housing number established by the state unfortunately does not mean that the housing developed will be affordable to local workers and residents. In our free market economy, those who bid the highest get the goods. When new houses become available, prices rise to the highest amount that someone is willing to pay for them, and that price, along the Central Coast of California, is way beyond what an average or below average income person can afford. Absent some governmental program, like an “inclusionary housing” program, every new house built will be “unaffordable” to a local resident with an average or below average income. What about making more land available? Since the law of supply and demand says that if the supply goes up, the prices will go down, you might think that would work. However, our “market” is not just our own local community. Anyone in the world can buy real estate in Monterey or Santa Cruz County. Average income people here are competing against Silicon Valley and the world beyond. Increasing the number of new houses increases community impacts, but since demand is so great from outside our community, it doesn’t make the housing more affordable to local workers and residents. We’re still outbid. Opening up more land for houses isn’t the automatic answer to the affordable housing problem, but good planning policies can be. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|
