Last week was the big hearing on the lawsuit Millbrae brought against the county in an attempt to block permanent homes for families and seniors that are currently experiencing homelessness. Now the three council members that brought the suit, Mayor Anders Fung, Anne Schneider, and Gina Papan have until the judge issues her final ruling, expected no later than June 26th,  to drop the case.

Why should they drop the case? Why is this such a terrible decision? 

San Mateo County has about 100 people that are on a waiting list for permanent supportive housing. These are seniors on fixed incomes that had rent increases they could not afford, or health emergencies that caused them to get behind on the rent. These are families fleeing domestic violence. These are working people that simply do not earn enough to keep up with rent, health care bills, food, and transportation. These are people that might serve you at the grocery store, they might look after your parents, they might teach your kids. These are people that are part of our community and they need help. Blocking housing for our most vulnerable neighbors is shocking and shameful. San Mateo County can make homelessness rare and brief, but we need leadership, especially from city council members.  For more information about ending homelessness, here is a resource from our friends at All Home: https://www.beginswithhome.org/

Help Support Homes for Homeless!

Though cities can always do more to promote housing affordability, many of San Mateo County’s jurisdictions deserve recognition for the changes they are making. Last week, HLC’s newsletter incorrectly claimed “not a single lower-income unit was proposed in the city [of San Carlos] in 2023.” 

In fact, according to San Carlos’s Housing Element Annual Progress Report, more than 300 homes were approved by the San Carlos city council in 2023, 30 low-income and 47 very low-income. Recent work by the city to rezone and change other development standards will make more projects easier to build in the future as well.

A number of factors can influence when building or occupancy permits will be issued, including those like higher interest rates or the timing of development submissions that are outside the city’s control. Understanding what permits a city has issued in a year requires reviewing the full Annual Progress Report. Mea culpa! 

A thoughtful commenter responded to our newsletter that: “I do not live or work in San Carlos, but after so many years of little housing being built there, the change is quite remarkable. They should be complimented on their efforts.” HLC agrees. 

242 homes proposed on a 2.2 acre lot at 11 El Camino Real, San Carlos, approved by the city council in 2023.

At the same time, cities across San Mateo County can continue working to change what they do control in order to make more development happen faster. Many developments proposed across the Bay Area have stalled because of higher interest rates, inflation and the increasing costs of building material, and the lack of capitol; all of San Mateo County’s jurisdictions saw a steep drop in the rate of building permits. However, cities are not passive actors. For many projects, cities still control most aspects of development, such as approval timelines, the flexibility of development standards, and fees. 

Planning for housing does not only happen in eight-year cycles or 20-year general plans; planning can be a continuous process of revision that responds to prevailing conditions and community needs. To say that cities have no control over housing development in the face of rising interest rates is like saying FEMA has no ability to respond to a hurricane disaster. No, FEMA cannot stop a hurricane, but it can help facilitate recovery. No, cities cannot save every development that has stalled due to bad financing, but they can save many of them and make new developments possible–even in a high interest rate environment–with proactive policy change, both by implementing housing elements and by looking beyond them.

Other cities in California demonstrate housing production is still possible. In 2023, the City of Sacramento (population ~550,000) issued more building permits than all of San Mateo County combined (population >750,000), the vast majority of permits for infill multi-family housing. Both the urban core of Sacramento and bayside San Mateo are largely “built out,” meaning most lots have a structure on them, but Sacramento is redeveloping more parcels at a faster rate than the San Mateo region.  

Caption: A table from Sacramento’s APR staff report

Sacramento makes housing easier to build in a number of ways. The vast majority of housing proposals are approved ministerially, without costly, time-consuming public hearings. The city has a local density bonus program that strongly rewards density, so that even proposals that are technically not zoning compliant can easily receive waivers and still get ministerially approved–and it has more flexible zoning, with more widespread multi-family zoning, to begin with. Furthermore, the city imposes more modest fees, with fee waivers or reductions for lower-income housing. 

Ultimately, entitling projects is only part of the process of building housing. The projects that get entitled need to actually be feasible to build. The things cities control–zoning rules, fee reductions, and fast, predictable timelines for both entitlements and building permits–directly impact development costs, influencing what developers can propose and what they can finance. 

Housing elements for the 6th RHNA cycle, though they include historic new policies leading to historic changes, may be just the beginning of the policy change necessary to enable the housing our communities need. 

Portola Valley has become the first city in the Bay Area, to have its housing element decertified by the state Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). 

The decertification occurred because Portola Valley violated one of the most unambiguously clear areas of housing element law: Rezoning deadlines. If a housing element is not certified by May 31, 2023, then rezonings must be completed by January 31, 2024 or a city cannot possibly be in compliance with state law. As of March 26, 2024, the date of its decertification, Portola Valley had still not rezoned. 

HLC remains committed to helping jurisdictions achieve and keep housing element compliance. We believe that HCD, which gave Portola Valley almost two months after the deadline to complete its rezoning, will work with jurisdictions to get back on track with delayed policies before revoking certifications. 

Portola Valley received certification from HCD on January 31, 2024, although the town had not yet completed its rezoning. The town received certification in large part because of years of effort by the council, staff, and community leaders to create a credible plan for the first multi-family housing in the town’s history. Some of the commitments in Portola Valley’s program, such as the dedication of a 2.5-acre publicly owned site for affordable homes, will create more tangible housing opportunities, while others, including an opt-in rezoning program, are downright innovative. 

After the 2022 election, some of the newly elected leadership delayed the plan and watered down some of its most impactful policies, repeatedly pushing back the housing element adoption date. Politically motivated delays led the town to fall behind on its housing element update. By the time Portola Valley achieved certification, it was already supposed to have completed its rezoning, but the town lacked the resources to pursue both the housing element update and rezoning simultaneously. 

On one hand, the resources required for housing element updates can absorb a city’s available capacity. On the other hand, Portola Valley has held 47 meetings related to its housing element, as reported by The Almanac, and they are short staffed after resistance to housing by the council caused most of the planning department to resign. 

HLC hears from local elected officials that they want local control over land use, that their city can solve the housing crisis given enough time and resources to plan. The housing element gave cities the opportunity to plan for housing on their own, and many cities, including Portola Valley, used the opportunity to plan for more affordable homes. But local control only works for housing when cities actually follow through on pro-housing policies. Now, despite the hard work by so many community members and elected leaders to create a realistic housing plan, Portola Valley faces consequences due to delays. 

From Portola Valley’s city notification announcing their decertification, “The proposed tentative schedule [for rezoning] is as follows:

• April 3, 2024 – Continuation of the March 20, 2024 Planning Commission meeting as a joint Planning Commission and ASCC meeting to review ASCC’s feedback on the draft amendments.
• April 17, 2024 – Planning Commission meeting for the Commission to complete its review of the draft amendments and consider adopting a resolution recommending approval to the Town Council of the zoning amendments.
• May 8, 2024 (tentative) – Town Council meeting (first reading).
• May 22, 2024 (tentative) – Town Council meeting (second reading).”