1 Vernice Hankins
From: Clerk Mailbox
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 11:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Housing Commission Recommendations to City Council regarding Draft Redline Revisions to the Adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
From: Leonora <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 9:07 PM
To: Theresa Marasco <[email protected]>; leslielambert92 <[email protected]>; Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; Clerk Mailbox <[email protected]>; Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing Commission Recommendations to City Council regarding Draft Redline Revisions to the Adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
EXTERNAL
Below please find the recommendations passed by the Housing Commission on 6/16/22. - Ensure affordable housing is not just a paper exercise and obtain revenue sources to make affordable housing a reality, inclusive of increased efficiency in the current budgetary process, and more robust resources for affordable housing.
- Prioritize affordable housing in historically blue and green lined neighborhoods. - Inaction has contributed to the segregation that exists and the City should take meaningful action to physically redistribute affordable housing equitably across the city. Steps are long overdue. There are no neutral actions and the City cannot fail to act.
Leonora Camner
Housing Commissioner
On Behalf of Santa Monica Housing Commission
Item 8.B
06/21/22
1 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
2 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
3 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
4 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
5 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
6 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
7 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
8 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
9 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
10 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
11 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
Item 8.B
06/21/22
12 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
REPEAL ARTICLE 34 in the CA state constitution; USE public land for PUBLIC GOOD, end systematic housing violence & displacement. Article 34 of the CA constitution reads; “No low rent housing project shall hereafter be developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner by any state public body until, a majority of the qualified electors of the city, town or county, as the case may be..”
Localities that have been abusing their positions and segregating cities by race & class should not decide what happens to public land. Workers that commute into cities also have the right to decide what happens to public land, retirees, college students, and many others also have that right!
“Heidi Marston resigns from LASHA, citing difficulties in fulfilling LAHSA's mission without"fundamental shifts". In her resignation letter, Marston elaborates:
"Power and funding alone control homelessness. But in our current system, organizations like the one I lead, the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), are not given control over regulatory or policy decisions, service providers remain underfunded, and dedicated front-line employees of non-profit organizations and government entities are hamstrung by rules, red tape, and bureaucracy. Marston also points to low wages, high rents, restrictive zoning laws, and other "shadow monsters'' we must tackle in order to end homelessness." https://medium.com/@hmarston2/the-homelessness-crisis-a-monster-of-our-own-maki ng-be5975399ce1
1 Item 8.B
06/21/22
13 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Structural Governance of the Social Housing Authority
The State Housing Authority - HCD will oversee
The Social Housing Authority; Community-led development of PS, affordable, & market-rate housing: Social Housing Agencies in each county in CA (ONE SOCIAL HOUSING AGENCY with selected progressive civil peers (community advocates) assigned to offices in each part of the county (likely NSEW & Mid-City, TBD);a group of progressive housing civil peers that implements & develops new community-owned affordable, market-rate, and PS rental housing on publicly owned land throughout LA County. Communities are well put together, mostly in walkable, pedestrian/bike-friendly built communities. The agency as a collective whole will capture vacancy numbers (parking lots, buildings (privately & publicly owned), to determine ownership/best use for vacant spaces.
The Social Housing Authority will override city councils in localities to partner directly with County BOS, and HCD to collect funding meant for homeless/housing 2 Item 8.B
06/21/22
14 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) spending, money goes into ONE TRUST account that must provide RECEIPTS of where/how much money is spent on specific projects.
Agency works with HUD to implement new guidelines for affordable homeownership for the blue-collar working class. Agency maintains ONE website/database that has a list of AVAILABLE community-owned affordable, market-rate, and PS rental housing. List of AVAILABLE affordable & market-rate homeownership opportunities.
Affordable housing waitlist for rental housing should be no longer than 6 months, 6 months is actually too long but should not exceed that. The social housing agency is focused on public safety, public safety means safety from heavy traffic violence and climate arson. This means the social housing team works to build communities that are walkable, bike, and pedestrian-friendly. Communities that have access to green space.
Communities that aren’t being heavily polluted by LAPD helicopter pilots (noise & fuel pollution linked to dementia, linked to cancer). Cars belong on the outside of multi-family communities, not within. Cars are occupying too much land space! Humans need land to live on, we shouldn’t NEED to drive everywhere. Create when possible 15-20 minute cities/small communities.
3 Item 8.B
06/21/22
15 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Social Agency is primarily focused on the development of community-owned housing. However, the agency will be divided into 3 primary teams; PSH, affordable & market-rate rentals, affordable & market-rate homeownership; Permanent Supportive Housing- PSH for residents in need of wraparound services. Services could be needed short or long-term depending on the person.
This team is focused on securing housing for residents with low-to-no income, chronically homeless, FOSTER youth (up to age 24), disabilities etc. This team doesn’t provide the services it connects other agencies & non-profits to PS housing.
This team maintains a database of PSH units that are available and works to revamp/remodel the broken shelter housing system to turn them into PSH.
Again, ONE social service housing website for residents with varying needs.
Foster Youth: safe and clean group homes that provide guidance & structure to youth/young adults up to the age of 24.
REVAMP the broken Foster System; guidance comes from social workers that are based out of the revamped DPSS, non-profits, grassroots teams, etc.).
PSH shouldn’t feel carceral (jail-prison like).
4 Item 8.B
06/21/22
16 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Supportive services are wraparound services in QUALITY family planning, STI/STD prevention/protection, mental, behavioral, & rehabilitation healthcare, etc, etc.
Introduce UBI, money that should come from another trust account will not come from the housing trust fund. UBI for foster youth, and adult residents not working or below the poverty line. UBI up to $1000 a month for completed work/ treatment assignments.
For displaced youth; completed schooling/work/etc. Standard UBI (no work /treatment assignments required) $300-$500.
Repeating; services are provided by A REVAMPED DPSS, by grassroots and non-profit teams, etc. Agency will provide a civil peer court system; will also be for any potential cases of alleged abuse happening from workers but all workers must have ongoing training, schooling, and teachings in proper behavior when interacting with residents in PSH communities, especially foster youth! Service teams should meet every few months to go over what is and what is not working, the social housing agency does not provide the service, they are simply making available the housing needed for the residents in need of PSH, possibly in need of long term care, healing, community.
The PSH Social Housing Team works with the DPSS to secure safe parking/dwelling zones within the county until PSH becomes available. All non-profit groups/service teams need to be an extension of this department (LASHA, DPSS, Grassroot teams, etc., etc.) Service teams should be able to contact PSH social agency team to find PSH, Safe parking/dwelling, and/or to receive money for temporary hotel/room stays (FEMA MONEY should be used as the ONE trust account is mostly for development/maintenance/admin of community-owned housing. ONE TRUST per county social agency/authority).
5 Item 8.B
06/21/22
17 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Community-Owned affordable & market-rate Housing; residents are self-sufficient, can pass a criminal background check likely just need assistance securing an affordable or market-rate unit. Will work with residents with a prior eviction. Community-owned affordable & market-rate rental housing that is always affordable. Rent shouldn’t take more than 20-30% of a resident's total income after taxes. Establish an affordable rental market-rate price for the blue-collar working class. The affordable price should not be averaged with working-class/high income earners included in the calculation. Most workers, most jobs in LA County pay about $40,000. What is the average wage for the blue-collar worker??? Community-owned, market-rate units will likely be much cheaper than privately owned market-rate.
All local city affordable housing authorities would be moved into the social agency/demolished. There are too many moving parts of the housing programs/processes. We need ONE coordinated system with FUNCTIONING non-profits, social service teams an extension of the one agency. Social workers, field workers, and rehousing specialists should be able to utilize the agency/website to secure at a minimum safe parking/safe dwelling. Should be able to give food vouchers/stamps, etc. to those that need them.
Again, the housing team is likely divided by local cities in the county, likely by NSEW & mid-city, TBD. Each of those divided teams will be divided into the 3 groups of; PSH, affordable & market-rate rentals, affordable & market-rate homeownership) Public Safety- A civil peer board of housing (court) will be established to hear cases about any potential threats to public safety happening in Socially owned housing. The court will also hear about allegations of any abuse happening within the system and 6 Item 8.B
06/21/22
18 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) correct the action. PSA on appropriate behavior will be provided to all residents/staff that are part of the social housing community.
The goal of the Social Housing agency is to prevent displacement but they will support “JUST-CAUSE” eviction for tenants posing a risk/threat to other tenants. No gang activity or violence WILL be tolerated, the community has a right to safety, if that safety is ever threatened, residents in the community have the right to evict! Some PSH will be for residents in transition from jail/prison back into community living. Prevent ROOT CAUSE of problems that we are seeing in our community. Also, consider communities for disabled residents/ residents with special needs that may need long-term wraparound services. Consider partnership with community colleges for affordable housing for students/young adults up to age 24-25. Consider committed behavioral, mental, and rehabilitation health programs for residents with outstanding issues in above mentioned. Any committed programs should still be a place of healing, not further violence and trauma. Dismantle and rebuild existing programs in that area.
Fix the problems at the ROOT, save the next generation and again, ongoing training, and schooling, for workers in this field. HIGHER pay for workers in these fields! 7 Item 8.B
06/21/22
19 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) The private housing market can always exist if it likes but residents shouldn't be forced to rely on it. There are residents whose families have been dealing with generational housing violence as it relates to race & class, they cannot rely on a privately owned market that has no accountability! Rent has gone up by over 65% within the last 10 years in LA County with no rebuttal for the blue-collar working class, retirees, residents of generational housing violence and displacement, college students, foster youth, and many many others. 8 Item 8.B
06/21/22
20 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) 9 Item 8.B
06/21/22
21 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) This social agency will have nothing to do with private housing developments but it can purchase private housing and it can assist with securing housing for residents in privately owned housing. The Social Agency will maintain a website of AVAILABLE community-owned affordable, market-rate, and PS rental housing units. Privately owned units can also be listed. <<< WATCH CYBER FRAUD/SCAMS which is rampant on apartment rental websites.
The social agency is being created to develop and implement new housing developments on vacant publicly owned land and remodels for publicly owned vacant buildings. The agency cannot deny community-owned housing developments in any neighborhood in LA County, they are a county-wide team that implements new developments of community-owned PS, affordable, and market-rate housing in ALL CITIES in the county, this includes SANTA MONICA, BEVERLY HILLS,
WEST HOLLYWOOD, MARINA DEL REY, PASADENA, DOWNEY, LONG
BEACH, etc., etc., etc., ALL CITIES IN LA COUNTY! The intentional segregation as it relates to race & class MUST end, THE NIMBY violence MUST END!
For community-owned affordable & market-rate housing, long-term residents of LA County should get priority with housing placements, focusing on getting workers closer to their jobs. It is imperative for the health of humans, the health of the Earth, and other species that we reduce drive times, and reduce pollution. Preventing displacement is IMPERATIVE. The team can prevent displacement by subsidizing rent for tenants in privately owned units and/or helping move them to community-owned affordable housing.
10 Item 8.B
06/21/22
22 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Affordable homeownership- full proposal coming soon, introduce co-ops, CLT’s, and resell requirements. The primary focus is blue-collar workers (affordable with resell requirements) and market-rate housing. Use money from market-rate sales to place into the ONE trust account. Insert grassroots team to help with restorative justice aspects of homeownership for residents impacted by systematic racial violence.
How do you think this story is going to end?????????
Short-term rentals- introduce tourism short-term stays, money goes into the ONE trust account.
Trust Account- One trust account that will be audited by city/state controllers. Money comes from HUD, Feds, State, Donations, & HHH. The annual state surplus budget must donate a portion into trust every year. The tourism industry should be donating a portion of total earnings into the trust. The cannabis industry should be donating a portion of money into the trust, should be redirecting money to communities impacted by the “pretend war on drugs” created by the U.S Gov’t. A small portion is for admin/resident manager fees (try to avoid outsourcing resident management to other companies, which could run up costs). The largest portion of the trust is for housing development/property maintenance.) How much are CA taxpayers giving in federal dollars to other states using the money for social services (TBD). 11 Item 8.B
06/21/22
23 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) Community-owned housing cannot be sold to corporations. If TOPA is introduced, keep under CLT (land lease) to allow tenants to purchase their units but prevent corporations from being able to purchase***??? (verify). Also, any money given to nonprofits to build affordable housing should mean that that housing cannot be sold to a corporation. How and why are some non-profits that received Gov’t/Taxpayer money able to sell affordable buildings after a set number of years to private corporations? Housing would go back to the social agency OR TOPA if the non-profit wanted to be released from oversight/responsibility. The Social Agency can buy privately owned property and resell it to private owners/corporations but NOT publicly owned land/housing, not rent nor ownership. Again, community-owned developments are going to be built with the community in mind, with green space, stores, hospitals, etc., sometimes worked/developed within the communities.
Social Housing Plans ready for implementation;
https://htwws.org/santamonicaairport/
(Author notes, not part of the proposal)
-Examine the years that ADOS (American descendants of Survivors paid federal taxes but were not able to utilize public service. Examine displacement and communities that were intentionally burned t the ground by supremacists. Request reimbursement/hold percent of federal/state taxes to heal communities.
-Tenancy in common is a form of co-ownership of property in which each party owns an undivided interest that passes to his or her heirs at death. The interest is undivided 12 Item 8.B
06/21/22
24 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) because each tenant has rights in the whole property. Although ownership is in common, tenants may have equal or unequal shares.
-Joint tenancy is the joint ownership of property by two or more co-owners in which each co-owner owns an undivided portion of the property. On the death of one of the joint tenants, their interest is automatically passed to surviving tenants. -Real property- immovable property, a building, land, plants etc, (though buildings can actually be moved depending on).
-Just cause eviction in CLT - Community members causing violence when corrective action cannot be taken, not working. Racial violence & other forms of discrimination.
Peer court will recommend rehabilitation programs when permitted to do so, severe cases could result in immediate evictions.
-Land on Earth belongs to all of humanity.
-Land has not been fairly distributed to residents impacted by systematic housing violence as it relates to race & class.
-The aim of the Surplus Land Act (the "Act"); is to increase the availability of real property in California for affordable housing development by requiring the prioritization of affordable housing when selling or leasing public lands no longer necessary for agency use.
-"Feb. 5, 1866: Thaddeus Stevens Proposes Land Distribution Amendment" https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/thaddeus-stevens-freedmens-bill/ 13 Item 8.B
06/21/22
25 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) -Foster City- examine the broken foster system, keeping families together whenever possible, family planning services, safe housing & family for youth that are not able to stay with their biological families.
To do;
-Write the state bar and include them on your housing emails. REQUIRE that the state bar authorize civil peers to oversee legal issues related to housing (LLP’s). -BLM the org must redirect funding into one trust that is overseen by a group of Black civil peers. Push money back into Black communities as direct UBI payment, as housing payments, treatment payments, crime & gang prevention, etc., etc. -Email OMBW/Watch for grants (GS)
-Civilian Eminent Domain of Public Land; communities protected from Climate arson; Free market exists for those that want to be part of it. -Establish Public Bank
-A PORTION of public land MUST remain PUBLICLY owned for use by the community.
-Agency divided into NSEW & Mid-City?!?! Civil Peer teams in NSEW & Mid-City ?? -If the BOS goes ROUGE, the social agency will partner with the state housing authority directly and override county BOS should they become non-compliant. 14 Item 8.B
06/21/22
26 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
The Social Housing Authority
(created by Tieira Ryder; 4/25/22 https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/) -representcal.org, why a constitutional convention is necessary, and how the CA constitution allows localities to abuse their position, allows illegal segregation as it relates to race & class.
-Examine pre-built tiny home/ADU placements in well put together communities that are affordable & supportive. Sheds are not tiny homes. Some residents already own tiny homes or they want to, can support themselves but need land. Communities likely could be supported in the valley.
15 Item 8.B
06/21/22
27 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: HowTheWest Was Saved <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 3:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 06/21/22 Santa Monica City council meeting; Comment on item 8B, Housing Element Attachments: SocialHousingAuthority.TieiraRyder.4-25-22.pdf
EXTERNAL
Hello,
We are asking HCD to support a county-led social housing team that is overseen by actual progressive housing advocates. Not much has changed in Santa Monica City's housing element and as a collective, we will NEVER get out of the housing crisis if we do not begin implementing a solid social housing policy across the entire U.S. Build more privately owned market-rate housing but residents cannot rely on a market that has proven unreliable!
The source has already granted us all permission to live on Earth.
Residents of varying "racial" & class backgrounds do not require the permission of another human to live anywhere on Earth. We must build housing in well-built communities that are walkable, bikefriendly, and affordable! The incorrectly zoned Santa Monica airport & penmar golf course MUST close in this housing cycle so that we can begin building housing surrounded by a large park! HCD, local residents are asking for your support in capturing PUBLIC land to be used for PUBLIC good. Localities that have been intentionally segregated by race & class cannot be expected to do the right thing.
https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/
‐‐
Best,
Item 8.B
06/21/22
28 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
2 Tieira
https://htwws.org/santamonicaairport/
https://youtu.be/WSFf00y-0uA To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Walkable, bike-friendly communities that are affordable are the right of every single human being. These communities are great for humanity, other species, and the Earth itself! Everything in the HUE-MANS life does NOT need to be a drive away.
Item 8.B
06/21/22
29 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
2021-2022
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Julie Rusk, chair
John Maceri, past chair
Karen Gunn, vice chair
Jody Priselac, vice chair
Natalya Zernitskaya, secretary
Perry Roshan-Zamir, treasurer
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Gary Avrech
Sheila Banani
Tara Baraukas
Claudia Bautista-Nichols
Lindsay Call
Stephanie Cohen
Timothy Conley
Donna Gentry
Ana Maria Jara
Shawn Landres
Ashley London
Janet Gollery McKeithen
Thomas McLaughlin
Jessy Morales
Tara Pomposini
Cynthia Rose
Laura Rosenbaum
Eric Shafer
Cecilia Tovar
Nat Trives
Angel Villaseñor
Michele Wittig
Leila Youssefi
Donald Zelaya
EMERITUS BOARD MEMBERS
Debra Farmer
Misti Kerns
The Human Relations Council of Santa Monica Bay Area is a non-profit organization that promotes a culture of fair treatment, inclusion and equal access to opportunities.
P.O. Box 1307 • Santa Monica, CA 90406 -1307
:hrcsantamonica.org :humanrelationscouncilsantamonicabay June 8, 2022
Re: June 28, 2022 Council Adoption of FY 2022/23 City of Santa Monica Budget Dear Mayor, City Council and City Staff:
The Human Relations Council (HRC) of Santa Monica Bay Area is a nonprofit organization that promotes a culture of fair treatment, inclusion, and equal access to opportunities. As such, we are deeply committed to equitable, sustained, creative and user-friendly community engagement and public participation. • We appreciate the City Council and staff commitment to greater access for public participation in Council and Board/Commission meetings through your support for “hybrid” meetings and provision of language access services.
This includes call-in and virtual options for public comment and readily available translation and interpretation services, particularly in Spanish and Amharic. We strongly believe that enabling greater public access in these ways is one required step to further the City’s goals of becoming a more equitable and inclusive community.
• We further encourage the City Council to provide the resources needed to support the City staff-created Equity Action Plan designed to ensure increased awareness, action and improved equity outcomes across all City departments.
In summary, we eagerly anticipate implementation progress across all departments on the City’s Equity Action Plan. Genuine and sustained progress on this Plan along with support for those who may not be able to attend in-person meetings and those who may need language support are foundational for a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive Santa Monica for all. When you adopt the FY 2022/23 City budget and department priorities, please adequately fund and restate your priority for this necessary and essential work.
Thank you for your service to the people who live, work and visit Santa Monica.
On Behalf of HRC Board With Kind Regards,
Julie Rusk
Item 8.B
06/21/22
30 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Debra Shepherd <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 11:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 8B
EXTERNAL
Good day Councilmembers:
I'm writing to you as a 20 plus year resident of the city of Santa Monica. I am also a person with lived experience of homelessness. I am currently a participant in the housing voucher program.
I know that you have a lot of input about housing, but I don't know how much of it actually comes from people like me. I watch your meetings regularly. Most feedback comes from people, who are insulated by their privilege. They have no lived experience of struggling for basic necessities.
When a person is struggling to pay rent, or they are unhoused, it's like drowning. It's a crisis that requires extraordinary measures. For the last 20 years, I have watched people kill projects with their privilege, that would have provided hundreds of units of affordable housing. The number of required units from the state is the result of that. It's not the state of California unfairly singling out the city of Santa Monica. We earned this number. It's time for us to accept the requirement, and do whatever is necessary to meet it.
Best Regards,
Debra Shepherd
Santa Monica resident
Item 8.B
06/21/22
31 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
2 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 11:06 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 8.B: Housing Element Draft Redline Revisions
EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As these Staff‐recommended revisions are reviewed, it should be noted that the Council’s actions in complying with the over‐reaching and counter‐productive state legislation will only serve to further undermine any future challenge the City may decide to undertake. Agenda Item 8.B Housing Element Draft Redline Revisions is simply the City’s latest action of acquiescence, dating back to 2019.
This sets the stage to further undermine the community wellbeing, further ration fixed amenities such as parks, and compromise the City’s already challenged long term financial situation.
To be specific, the financial downside is amplified by the simultaneous increase in (unfunded) service and infrastructure requirements and the initiative to convert destination retail space to residential, eliminating city sales tax revenues in the process. This strategy leaves significant tax increases on existing residents as the only option.
The reality of Santa Monica’s housing capacity and history of addition Santa Monica’s has added so much housing that its current stock translated into 1.78 residents per housing unit according to the 2020 census. To place this into context, the City of Los Angeles is 46% higher at 2.61 residents per housing unit. The Statewide average of 2.75 residents per housing unit is 54% higher than Santa Monica. Santa Monica has one of the lowest levels of any city in the state.
How did Santa Monica achieve such housing abundance? Since 1960, Santa Monica has added a net 1.5 housing units for each new resident, children included. This translates into 14,795 net new housing units servicing a net population increase of 9,794.
Item 8.B
06/21/22
32 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
3 In fact, Santa Monica kept building new housing units even in decades that experienced net declines in city population! During the 1980s and 1990s, Santa Monica had a 4,230 net decline in population. Despite that decline, the city built 1,445 net new housing units during that same period.
To be clear, that 60‐year building trend was not in response any historical overcrowding. In 1960, the average number of people per housing unit in Santa Monica was 2.23. The 2.65 in the City of Los Angeles was 19% higher than Santa Monica. The average over the entire State in 1960 was 2.88, 29% higher than Santa Monica.
Moreover, since 1980s, Santa Monica has added 4,000 affordable housing units, representing about 70% of the housing stock added since 1980 and 10% of the City’s entire current multi‐ family housing stock.
Despite this housing abundance reality, the Council has yet to seriously challenge the arbitrary and onerous state allocations.
The state‐defined shortage in Santa Monica relates to residents, NOT housing.
To be clear, Santa Monica does not have a shortage of housing. According to the arbitrary RHNA process that this item relates to, the State has actually deemed that Santa Monica has a shortage of new residents.
By definition, any “solution” to this misdirected state‐defined “problem” provides no benefit to current residents and will – in fact – be to their detriment. If the Council continues to service this unsupported and unjustified RHNA process, it will be decreasing its ability to defend its residents, which is one of the City Council’s core responsibilities.
How does the State justify the need for increasing residents in Santa Monica? Out of the 8,895 units of housing being required by the State, 1,156 units (13%) are acknowledged as the true future organic growth requirement of the City in the next eight years. The other 7,739 units (87%) are related to hypothetical concepts of “existing need” which are defined as 4,300 units that should be built due to the existence of “high quality Item 8.B
06/21/22
33 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
4 transit areas” (HQTA) – bus stops – and 2,749 units due to proximity to places of employment.
Then there is a catchall of around 690 more units just for good measure.
How relevant is this “existing need”? The state’s definition of HQTA has been defined as basic bus service. Yet, the BBB’s (and LA Metro) actual transit utility is so low that ridership is at an all‐time low, and remains in a decline that predated the pandemic.
The jobs requirement is related to “workforce” housing. But, as cities such as Santa Monica are within larger metropolitan areas, the traditional (and only logical) concept has been to look at jobs and housing on a broader regional scale to account for the fact that as people change jobs, they do not need to change living location. Under the new state models, it appears that workers are conveniently assumed not to change jobs. But when they actually do, and they no longer work in Santa Monica, will they consequently lose their housing to make way for others who take their place in those Santa Monica jobs? Of course not.
This is an opportunity for Council action to defend the residents The prior City Council failed the residents in pushing back against this nonsensical State overreach at its inception.
Each iteration of staff compliance with State demands reduces the City’s ability to defend its residents.
Does the Council want to continue on this path? Many residents feel that there needs to be a significant policy course correction.
Thank you,
Marc L. Verville
Sunset Park
Santa Monica
Item 8.B
06/21/22
34 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
5 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 10:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Jing Yeo; David Martin; David White Subject: City Council 6/21 agenda item 8-B -- Revised Husing Element
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members,
Agenda item 8-B staff report:
http://www.acgov.org/board/bos_calendar/documents/DocsAgendaReg_11_18_21/GENERAL%20ADMINISTRATION/Re gular%20Calendar/Housing_Element_RHNA_11_18_21.pdf
1) On page 3 of 8 of the staff report for item 8-A on the City Council's 6/21 agenda, it says that overall housing capacity was increased to over 13,000 units.
Does that mean that Planning staff will then propose zoning changes to accommodate 13,000 additional housing units? Why do this when we're only required to zone for 9,000?
2) This plan includes allowing 300+ housing units at 4th/5th & Arizona, leaving no room for a park.
3) This plan includes allowing 700+ housing units at the Bergamot Arts Center. What will happen to the art galleries?
4) Up zoning even more of the city city than necessary for 9,000 housing units (which was a ridiculous number to begin with) will allow investors from near and far to buy up property for speculation.
This will not benefit residents and, if that much housing is actually built, it will create enormous stress on city infrastructure, especially water.
5) Will outdoor watering restrictions eventually move from 2x per week to 2x per month? Why not just cut down all the trees in the city and be done with it, rather than watch them sicken and die from lack of water?
6) We can also go ahead and replace all the remaining grass with decomposed granite, asphalt, and cement, thus creating a gigantic heat island in Santa Monica.
7) In addition, legislation currently moving through the state legislature will remove all parking requirements for new construction, so imagine thousands of new daily car trips as residents drive around looking for street parking.
What a great way to make a city unlivable.
Zina Josephs (Santa Monica resident since 1970)
Item 8.B
06/21/22
35 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
6 Vernice Hankins
From: Daniel Galamba <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 9:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Oscar de la Torre; Daniel Galamba
Subject: June 21, 2022 City Council Meeting: Please Oppose Item 8.B. Housing Element Draft Redline Revisions
EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
I request that you oppose the draft Housing Element Redline Revisions.
These revisions are based on a ridiculous RHNA assessment of 9,000 units that will result in Santa Monica's population increasing by 20% over 8 years with all the resulting traffic, congestion, gridlock, public services and infrastructure that go along with it. All not paid by the State. California's and Los Angeles County's population has increased by about 2% over the past 10 years. Santa Monica's population has increased by only about 3% over this same 10 year period.
Therefore requiring a 20% increase in Santa Monica's population over 8 years is just simply up zoning so developers can make more money at our expense.
These 9,000 units include 6,000 affordable units that will cost about $3 billion. Again, not paid by the State. We don't have $440 million to pay our unfunded pension obligations let alone $3 billion for 6,000 affordable units. Therefore, over time the requirement that these units be affordable will be dropped and market rate units will then go in there because there will be the money for that. This is just a two‐step process so developers can make more money at our expense. This will destroy our City as developers did in Westwood and West Los Angeles in the 1980's. Now people don't want to live in West Los Angeles anymore or come to Westwood Village or West Los Angeles anymore and both Westwood Village and West Los Angeles are going down hill and I don't want the same thing to happen to us in Santa Monica and it will.
I therefore request that you suspend working with the State on these Housing Element Revisions and join other cities (e.g. Pasadena) in legal action against the State until the State accepts a RHNA that reflects a realistic 2‐3% population growth in Santa Monica over 8 years. Please don't let our City of Santa Monica be looted by greedy developers as they did in Westwood and West Los Angeles in the 1980's. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Dr Daniel Galamba
Item 8.B
06/21/22
36 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Nancy Coleman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 3:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; [email protected]; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Jing Yeo; David Martin Subject: Item 8B
EXTERNAL
To: Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members
From: Nancy Coleman
Date: June 21, 2022
Re Item 8 B, Housing Element
8 B Housing Element
While I understand that the goal of tonight’s effort is to approve a state acceptable Housing Element there are a number of questions still outstanding. The Council needs to think about where parks will be when all city‐owned property is designated for affordable housing. Santa Monica is already a park pour community.
The increased height and FAR for Neighborhood Commercial streets is not acceptable. 55 feet is too high. If state bonuses are applied it will be even higher.
1) On page 3 of 8 of the staff report for item 8-A on the City Council's 6/21 agenda, it says that overall housing capacity was increased to over 13,000 units.
Does that mean that Planning staff will then propose zoning changes to accommodate 13,000 additional housing units? Why do this when we're only required to zone for 9,000 and this is too many for the city. 2) This plan includes allowing 300+ housing units at 4th/5th & Arizona, leaving no room for a park. 3) This plan includes allowing 700+ housing units at the Bergamot Arts Center. What will happen to the art galleries? 4) Up zoning even more of the city, including the increased heights of up to 84 feet in a portion of the DCP and Bergamot plus state bonuses will make the City of Santa Monica have the look of downtown Miami. is the than necessary for 9,000 housing units?
Item 8.B
06/21/22
37 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22
2 This will not benefit residents and, if that much housing is actually built, it will create enormous stress on city infrastructure, especially water.
Nancy Coleman
Item 8.B
06/21/22
38 of 38 Item 8.B
06/21/22