ARTICLE
We are closing in on the last month of 2023 and gearing up for 2024. With the clock turned back, the days are shorter and the weather is turning to December weather. The prediction is for a wet winter, but we’ll wait and see. One thing is certain – 2024 will be a blizzard of election material hitting your doorsteps and mailboxes, campaign signs, and coverage in local media outlets and on social media. December 8, 2023 is the deadline to have your name appear as a candidate or for a measure to be on the March 5, 2024 ballot. There is a lot of scrambling of potential candidates, lively behind the scenes conversations about potential ballot measures in the city of Santa Cruz and throughout Santa Cruz County. Earlier this week, the Santa Cruz Sentinel Editorial Board opined with this column Sentinel 11/28/2023 Election Season which is a brief preview of what is in store for the March 5, 2024 primary. The column is a mixture of comments about national, state and local issues. We’ll provide a more detailed report after the Dec. 8 filing deadline about the candidates and qualified measures. The Housing for People measure qualified via a signature petition of registered voters in the City. It doesn’t take much effort to gather the small percentage of signatures to get on the ballot. Their website is here: https://www.housingforpeople.org/ The real questions about the significant impacts a measure like this will create are blurred by limited information from a group of citizens that do not want increased building heights for housing projects in the downtown and along major transit corridors within the city. Not to be an alarmist, but when a citizen-lead signature gathering petition qualifies for a local ballot, it does not move through a public vetting process, nor is there significant evidence to back up the storylines on their campaign website. At a recent council meeting, the city council approved a recommendation for the staff to provide legal and financial information about this measure. The cost-benefit analysis report will be conducted and returned to the city council in early January 2024. Finding a consultant to do this analysis in less than two months and just 50 days shy of the March 5 election date is a daunting task. This leaves little to zero understanding of the impacts of the measure other than the stated lofty goals on the proponent’s campaign website. It is clear that the intent of the measure is to take away the public process from the city planning and community development department and the decision making of the elected city council. In return, a proposed development would be placed on an ‘special election ballot’ for city voters to say Yes or No to the project. We have known for decades that the cost of housing in Santa Cruz County far outpaces the median income of a working family. The bold statement that the initiative will increase affordable housing to 25% in any new (voter approved) development over 30 units has no basis it will happen. Again there is no evidence that the building will be built. Housing affordability is tied to supply and demand, cost of land, construction costs, city permit fees and the already labor and time intensive entitlement process not to mention obtaining financing for the public vetting process and construction. Jumping to the conclusion that increasing the affordable unit count to 25% has no basis in reality. The argument that this initiative puts the development approval process in the hands of the city’s registered voters is a false narrative. It actually does the opposite, it removes the accountability of our elected city council and the due diligence of the city staff who are assigned to do this work. The second item and probably most pressing issue is related to the City of Santa Cruz's budget and services. At Tuesday’s city council meeting Item 23 — A resolution requesting the placement of a Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure on the March 5, 2024 election. The Agenda Report states: “Santa Cruz is committed to delivering quality services to its community. With a vision for a vibrant, healthy and resilient community for all, the Council encourages and supports seeking improved methods for service delivery, modernizing the organization, and keeping up with changing community needs. Santa Cruz employees are dedicated to the pursuit of these objectives and continue to passionately execute their work to deliver a high standard of services. However, a rapidly growing, dynamic community often means that revenues cannot keep pace with expenditures needed for essential services such as wildfire resilience, homelessness response and connection to services, protection of natural resources such as waterways, maintenance and repair of streets and neighborhood parks, and affordable and workforce housing.” In other words: a proposed Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure is aimed at addressing the city's budget and services. The City continues to deliver baseline essential services to the community but also faces many situations where the services must be provided to more and more users, where new services are needed, or where resource intensive changes are necessary for an existing service. There are also many unprecedented emergencies arising. While many of these include generous one-time state and federal disaster related funding support, that funding support does not backfill for lost staff time in delivering the baseline essential services, or the rapid increase in deferred projects that need funding and staffing. Another factor is the substantial increase in costs for vendor services, parts, and general inventory for City operations – e.g., fuel, computer chips, lumber, engineering design services, personal protective equipment, vehicles, etc. The net impact of these factors shows a forecast where the City’s General Fund will, if nothing else is done, fall below its minimum reserve threshold (~17%) by FY 2025, and be depleted by FY 20271. The City concluded several polls over the past couple of years outlining what the likely voters would see if a tax increase. The key findings of that most recent poll: • The cost of living/housing and homelessness are top concerns for voters. Public safety, parks, and streets are not as top-of-mind in the current environment. • Voters don’t perceive much progress on homelessness; however, most are still willing to consider a tax increase to protect progress in addressing it. • Initially, a sales tax measure focused on addressing homelessness receives more support than one where it is less central. However, both are vulnerable to opposition and end up in the same place. It appears that the 0.5 (1/2 cent) tax measure will be on the March ballot. There is also discussion that the County of Santa Cruz and other local jurisdictions are also considering tax proposals too. Stay tuned for more election information in the coming weeks.
We are closing in on the last month of 2023 and gearing up for 2024. With the clock turned back, the days are shorter and the weather is turning to December weather. The prediction is for a wet winter, but we’ll wait and see.
One thing is certain – 2024 will be a blizzard of election material hitting your doorsteps and mailboxes, campaign signs, and coverage in local media outlets and on social media. December 8, 2023 is the deadline to have your name appear as a candidate or for a measure to be on the March 5, 2024 ballot. There is a lot of scrambling of potential candidates, lively behind the scenes conversations about potential ballot measures in the city of Santa Cruz and throughout Santa Cruz County. Earlier this week, the Santa Cruz Sentinel Editorial Board opined with this column Sentinel 11/28/2023 Election Season which is a brief preview of what is in store for the March 5, 2024 primary. The column is a mixture of comments about national, state and local issues. We’ll provide a more detailed report after the Dec. 8 filing deadline about the candidates and qualified measures.
The Housing for People measure qualified via a signature petition of registered voters in the City. It doesn’t take much effort to gather the small percentage of signatures to get on the ballot. Their website is here: https://www.housingforpeople.org/
The real questions about the significant impacts a measure like this will create are blurred by limited information from a group of citizens that do not want increased building heights for housing projects in the downtown and along major transit corridors within the city. Not to be an alarmist, but when a citizen-lead signature gathering petition qualifies for a local ballot, it does not move through a public vetting process, nor is there significant evidence to back up the storylines on their campaign website.
At a recent council meeting, the city council approved a recommendation for the staff to provide legal and financial information about this measure. The cost-benefit analysis report will be conducted and returned to the city council in early January 2024. Finding a consultant to do this analysis in less than two months and just 50 days shy of the March 5 election date is a daunting task. This leaves little to zero understanding of the impacts of the measure other than the stated lofty goals on the proponent’s campaign website. It is clear that the intent of the measure is to take away the public process from the city planning and community development department and the decision making of the elected city council. In return, a proposed development would be placed on an ‘special election ballot’ for city voters to say Yes or No to the project. We have known for decades that the cost of housing in Santa Cruz County far outpaces the median income of a working family. The bold statement that the initiative will increase affordable housing to 25% in any new (voter approved) development over 30 units has no basis it will happen. Again there is no evidence that the building will be built. Housing affordability is tied to supply and demand, cost of land, construction costs, city permit fees and the already labor and time intensive entitlement process not to mention obtaining financing for the public vetting process and construction. Jumping to the conclusion that increasing the affordable unit count to 25% has no basis in reality.
The argument that this initiative puts the development approval process in the hands of the city’s registered voters is a false narrative. It actually does the opposite, it removes the accountability of our elected city council and the due diligence of the city staff who are assigned to do this work.
The second item and probably most pressing issue is related to the City of Santa Cruz's budget and services. At Tuesday’s city council meeting Item 23 — A resolution requesting the placement of a Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure on the March 5, 2024 election. The Agenda Report states: “Santa Cruz is committed to delivering quality services to its community. With a vision for a vibrant, healthy and resilient community for all, the Council encourages and supports seeking improved methods for service delivery, modernizing the organization, and keeping up with changing community needs. Santa Cruz employees are dedicated to the pursuit of these objectives and continue to passionately execute their work to deliver a high standard of services. However, a rapidly growing, dynamic community often means that revenues cannot keep pace with expenditures needed for essential services such as wildfire resilience, homelessness response and connection to services, protection of natural resources such as waterways, maintenance and repair of streets and neighborhood parks, and affordable and workforce housing.”
In other words: a proposed Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure is aimed at addressing the city's budget and services. The City continues to deliver baseline essential services to the community but also faces many situations where the services must be provided to more and more users, where new services are needed, or where resource intensive changes are necessary for an existing service. There are also many unprecedented emergencies arising. While many of these include generous one-time state and federal disaster related funding support, that funding support does not backfill for lost staff time in delivering the baseline essential services, or the rapid increase in deferred projects that need funding and staffing. Another factor is the substantial increase in costs for vendor services, parts, and general inventory for City operations – e.g., fuel, computer chips, lumber, engineering design services, personal protective equipment, vehicles, etc. The net impact of these factors shows a forecast where the City’s General Fund will, if nothing else is done, fall below its minimum reserve threshold (~17%) by FY 2025, and be depleted by FY 20271.
The City concluded several polls over the past couple of years outlining what the likely voters would see if a tax increase. The key findings of that most recent poll:
• The cost of living/housing and homelessness are top concerns for voters. Public safety, parks, and streets are not as top-of-mind in the current environment.
• Voters don’t perceive much progress on homelessness; however, most are still willing to consider a tax increase to protect progress in addressing it.
• Initially, a sales tax measure focused on addressing homelessness receives more support than one where it is less central.
However, both are vulnerable to opposition and end up in the same place.
It appears that the 0.5 (1/2 cent) tax measure will be on the March ballot. There is also discussion that the County of Santa Cruz and other local jurisdictions are also considering tax proposals too. Stay tuned for more election information in the coming weeks.