One huge drawback of California’s election laws is that anybody who can garner sufficient signatures can place anything on the ballot through the initiative process. Good idea, bad ideas, crazy or stupid ideas — if you can convince enough people to sign a petition, it’ll get voted on.
San Jose is seeing one of those lying and deceptive efforts right now, as early voting has already started for the June 5 primary.
That deception, sponsored by billionaire developers, is being commonly referred to as the “Evergreen Senior Homes Initiative” and it is anything but that. Measure B, as it appears on the ballot, looks simple enough:
Shall an initiative measure be adopted: (1) changing San José’s General Plan to create a Senior Housing Overlay to allow conversion of land designated for employment use to seniorhousing citywide; and (2) changing the Evergreen-
East Hills Development Policy and Municipal Code, and adding a Specific Plan to allow development of up to 910 residential unitson an approximately 200-acre Industrial Site in Evergreen for individuals 55 and over and other qualifying individuals?
Looks simple enough, right?
That is what the sponsors are counting on. What they are also counting on is that most voters will not have the knowledge — of city ordinances, state laws, environmental regulations, land-use policies, and more — to actually sit down for a couple of hours to read and understand the 367-page initiative.
And of course, if something looks too good to be true, it likely is.
This initiative does two things specifically:
- Creates the Evergreen Senior Homes Specific Plan, a 910-home housing development on 200 acres of open space on the far eastern edge of San Jose, adjacent to the foothills.
- Creates a Senior Housing Overlay that can be applied to unspecified sites throughout the city of San Jose.
Sounds reasonable enough, doesn’t it? Who could be against increased housing in this tight housing market? The fliers being sent out by proponents even say this will be affordable housing. Well, sure, if your idea of affordable is a multi-million McMansion on the hillsides overlooking San Jose.
According to Measure B opponents, the proposal:
weakens San Jose’s existing affordable housing requirements. Senior housing projects built under this initiative would only be required to provide 6% of their units for families earning less than $100,000/year, rather than 20% as currently required. ... Although the developers make claims about “affordable housing,” the proposed project is a gated community with overwhelmingly million-dollar luxury homes.
The fine print of Measure B shows that it will overrule the city’s General Plan not only for this project, but for each and every development proposal to come along in the future. That is, this does away with San Jose’s long-range plans, which were developed and hashed out over a period of years through more than 50 public meetings, and with input from more than 5,000 community participants, a 40-member task force of community members, and then unanimous approval of the City Council.
And you know how developers generally have to pay for utility and street upgrades when they develop a block of land? Not in this case; Measure B says that city residents, not the developers, will end up covering those fees. And where will that come from? Taxes, of course. Unless the city does not raise taxes to pay for these things, in which case services will need to be cut to make up the shortfall.
For these reasons alone, much less other concerns, Measure B is being opposed by the San Jose mayor, each and every member of the city council, mayors and officials of nearby communities, our local state senators and assemblymembers, and many others.
And, in a case of lions laying down with the lambs, or politics making strange bedfellows, or any other cliche you can think of, Measure B is opposed by both the Santa Clara County Democratic Party and the Santa Clara County Republican Party!
A list of opponents to Measure B can be found here. And yes, my name is on this list, as is the homeowner’s association to which I belong. I have also gathered information about this proposal from Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society and Committee for Green Foothills, two outstanding environmental organizations which I strongly support.
CGF and SCVAS, along with many other groups, are resisting Measure B because it could lead to much easier development of outlying areas, areas which are now green and growing, including the valuable farmlands of nearby Coyote Valley.
A list of reasons to oppose Measure B is found here. The most important reasons to vote “no” are:
- Cost the city $24.5 million per year in increased services, such as police, fire, libraries, and parks
- Increase traffic across the region
- Weaken San Jose’s affordable housing requirements
- Encourage residential growth on the outskirts of the city, resulting in sprawl development
CGF says:
Although touted by its proponents as providing affordable housing and creating open space, this initiative would actually weaken existing affordable housing requirements, and the only open space left once the development is built would be the 100-foot buffer zone along Fowler Creek, which runs through the development site.
Developments or projects approved via voter initiative bypass the environmental review process of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as well as the usual planning process that allows for public participation and review.
in an op-ed piece, Santa Clara Valley Audubon says:
It will weaken the requirements on future development for affordable housing that the city regularly imposes on builders of luxury homes.
These sinister amendments to the general plan will modify San Jose’s blueprint for development in ways that will sharply reduce the city’s revenue while increasing the cost of providing services. This will cause a deficit of $24.5 million per year to the general fund, and residents will feel the pain.
Unless voters are willing to pay more taxes to make up for the deficit, services will have to be cut. The result will be less money for police, fire, emergency services, parks, libraries and community centers. It will mean less cleanup of trash and graffiti and less road maintenance. Meanwhile, the Big Bad Wolves will be laughing all the way to the bank.
So, who’s sponsoring this proposal? One of the leaders in the effort is a billionaire developer named Carl Berg. In a piece written by former San Jose Mayor Tom McEnery, he points out:
(Berg) is one of the wealthiest men in our valley and America. He once owned a soccer team, often appears on the Forbes richest list and, now, he frequently turns up at City Hall. Unlike many other successful developers and entrepreneurs … he is becoming a major annoyance in our city. … He now lectures the San Jose City Council on their lapses in judgment and common development sense while he contributes liberally to the cottage industry of lobbyists and their fellow travelers in that community of shills and wannabes. Couldn’t he fund a library somewhere, or a theatre? Or just buy another sports team or purchase an island in the South Pacific and annoy the natives instead?
However, all is not lost, despite the slick ads now filling our mailboxes. While state law does not allow a competing second ballot measure to directly battle another one, San Jose officials managed to figure out a way around that, and thus we have Measure C to vote for.
Measure C, sponsored by the city, says simply:
Shall San José’s Charter be amended, notwithstanding any measure on the June 5, 2018 ballot or other San José law, to restrict development of non-employment uses on designated lands in outlying areas near San José’s Urban Growth Boundary, including Almaden Valley, Coyote Valley, and Evergreen foothills, unless the City Council determines such development will not adversely affect the City financially, will satisfy increased affordable housing requirements, and will mitigate environmental impacts and pay appropriate fees for road improvements to address traffic impacts?
In a Mercury News op-ed, Mayor Sam Liccardo writes:
Measure C would protect our hillsides and open spaces from sprawl and choking traffic by strengthening the city’s ability to deny such projects in our environmentally sensitive, outlying areas. By reinforcing the city’s greenbelt against development, Measure C also protects the great legacy of my predecessor, Mayor Janet Gray Hayes.
If the council does approve such projects in our outlying areas, Measure C ensures that our community gets real affordable housing – half of the homes must be affordable to residents of modest means, rather than the lip service that Measure B’s billionaires pay toward affordability. It also requires sustainability, using “zero net energy” design and recycled water for landscaping in the project. Finally, Measure C imposes responsibility for paying for costly new services on the developers, not taxpayers.
Measure C ensures that if we allow new development in outlying areas, it benefits our community, and not just billionaire developers.
I know this is long. But for more information, please see the following:
I also recognize that, as a local issue, this may be of no concern to most of the people reading this piece. However, if you live in San Jose, please vote against Measure B and for Measure C.
If you have family or friends who vote in San Jose, make sure to send them the link to this diary, or links to any other information they might find valuable. Please make sure that they vote against Measure B and for Measure C.
Measure B is being bankrolled by billionaires. Those in opposition cannot compete monetarily. But we can compete with numbers. Take a look at the long list of bipartisan opposition to Measure B that I linked above.
Please pass the word. If you have a Twitter account, or a Facebook account, please spread this diary as widely as you can. Tell your family, your friends, your neighbors. We must get the word out!
Vote No on B and Yes on C!