July
5, 2003
Chairman
Jerry Smith and Members
Board of Directors, Fort Ord Reuse Authority
100 12th Street, Building 2880
Marina, CA 93933
RE:
FORA Action on July 11, 2003 to Create And Maintain Affordable Housing
Dear
Chairman Smith and Board Members:
I
am writing on behalf of the Board of Directors and members of LandWatch
Monterey County. LandWatch has about 1,000 members, countywide.
Our mission is to promote and inspire sound land use policy at the
local level, through grassroots community action. LandWatch is specifically
concerned that local land use policies advance the local economy,
promote social equity, and protect our natural environment.
LandWatch
strongly urges your yes vote for the set of affordable
housing recommendations submitted to you by Congress Member Sam
Farr. We believe that the adoption of these policies will, in
fact, have a major positive impact on our local economy, help ensure
that the development of the former Fort Ord contributes to increased
social equity, and improves our natural environment.
As
you know, Congress Member Farr has recommended a set of seven affordable
housing policies, and an implementation program, which is contained
in his recommendation #8. This letter outlines our reasons for supporting
the entire package of recommendations that Congress Member Farr
has proposed. We note, however, that six out of the seven recommendations
are largely non-controversial. The tough recommendation
is recommendation #4, which would require that 50% of the new housing
constructed on the former Fort Ord be affordable to
persons at the very low, low, moderate, and workforce
income levels. We encourage your support for all seven of the policy
recommendations made by Congress Member Farr, including taking on
the tough challenge posed by recommendation #4.
I
personally attended the FORA Executive Committee meeting held on
July 3rd, and listened attentively to the concerns raised by Executive
Committee members at that meeting. Here are LandWatchs arguments
in favor of the recommendations that you will consider on July 11th,
with particular attention to the concerns expressed at the Executive
Committee meeting:
-
It Is Appropriate For FORA To Set A Policy Standard
The law establishing FORA makes clear that FORA is supposed
to set the standards for the reuse of the former Fort Ord. It
is not true that FORA is simply supposed to accommodate whatever
the various local governments decide. FORA is specifically charged
with telling the local governments what they need to do. The primary
vehicle for FORA to do that is the Fort Ord Reuse Plan.
Government Code Section 67675 specifically charges FORA with the
responsibility not only to prepare but to revise
from time to time a plan for the future use and development
of Fort Ord. Government Code Section 67675.2 makes clear that
the local governments must follow the FORA Plan, as it may be
revised from time to time. Therefore, it is certainly
appropriate for FORA to consider whether it should
now set a standard for affordable housing, as part of the plan
for the reuse of the former Fort Ord.
- The
Fort Ord Reuse Authority Is a Separate Level of Government
At the Executive Committee meeting, some FORA Board Members
said that if FORA adopted an affordable housing standard, applicable
to the reuse of the former Fort Ord, that this would be inappropriate
because FORA cannot set policy, or because that would
make FORA into a separate level of government. The
Government Code makes clear that FORA not only can
set policy, but that setting policy is its most important responsibility.
Furthermore, Government Code Section 67657 specifically says that
the powers and duties granted to the authority
shall
prevail over those of any local entity, including any city or
county
Section 67659 makes clear that FORA is considered
to be a special district for the purpose of the initiative
and referendum law, so FORA, in fact, is a separate level
of government already. The voters of the authority can legislate
directly, if the FORA Board of Directors does not do what they
want.
- Housing
Issues Are Definitely Within The Scope of FORAs Authority
Government Code Section 67675 (c)1 says that the Fort Ord
Reuse Plan shall include a land use plan that sets
the criteria and standards for the uses of land on
the former Fort Ord. This section of the law specifically says
that the land use plan shall designate areas of the
base for residential
and other uses, and may specify
maximum development intensities and other standards and criteria.
Government Code Section 67675(d) specifically allows FORA to include
a housing element in the Fort Ord Reuse Plan. Again,
the question is not whether FORA has the authority to set a housing
standard. They clearly have that authority. The question
is whether the Board of Directors is willing to do that, and if
so, what standard they should set.
- Its
Right To Demand That FORA Establish A Policy On Affordable Housing
What Congress Member Farr is asking FORA to do, procedurally,
is exactly what FORA ought to do set an appropriate standard
for the future reuse of Fort Ord, where affordable housing is
concerned. It may well be that affordable housing issues were
not at a crisis point when the Fort Ord Reuse Plan was initially
adopted. They are now! Under the current Reuse Plan, approximately
6,000 new residential units will be constructed on the former
Fort Ord. Its only right and proper for FORA to set a
standard, so the public will be given certainty about how many
of those units will be affordable to the ordinary income families
of Monterey County.
- FORA
Should Do Better Than The Minimum - FORA Board
Members at the Executive Committee repeatedly pointed out that
the current redevelopment law requires local governments to build
at least 15% affordable housing. LandWatch thinks that FORA should
do better than the minimum. Whatever FORA thinks
the standard ought to be, however, FORA should set that standard.
Unless FORA establishes a standard itself, there will be no guarantee
whatsoever that any affordable housing will ever be built on the
former Fort Ord. Redevelopment requirements may well be suspended,
as they have been in the past, because of severe budget cutbacks
at the state level, and good intentions from the local
governments is not the same as a requirement.
- Sure,
It Will Be Hard To Reach The 50% Standard
Most discussions about affordable housing on the former
Fort Ord quickly diverge into a rehearsal of all the problems.
These problems are real, but theyre problems facing the
development of any housing on the former Fort Ord. While there
are definitely cleanup and infrastructure
costs on Fort Ord, the land is essentially free. This
is some of the most valuable real estate in the world, and if
FORA tells developers that they have to meet a higher affordable
housing standard than they do elsewhere, they will meet
it (or not develop).
- The
Argument That 50% of Zero is Zero Is Not Persuasive
There is absolutely no reason to believe that establishing
a 50% affordable housing requirement, as recommended by Congress
Member Farr, will result in zero development. In fact,
both the moderate and workforce levels
of housing he urges are profitable for a market rate
developer. Nonprofit developers have been known to achieve 60%
affordability in a mixed-income development (Los Arroyos, in Gilroy,
as an example). The recent affordable housing study commissioned
by the City of Salinas makes clear that a 40% requirement for
very low, low, and moderate income housing is attainable. That
is exactly what Congress Member Farr recommends. Finally, even
supposing that the 50% requirement delayed development, the community
might still be better off. If 85% of the homes constructed on
the former Fort Ord cost more than $525,000 (the lowest
price of a KB Home in Seaside), then it might well be better to
wait until later, so that genuine community needs can be met.
- Water
Is Not An Issue With Respect To The Affordable Housing Policy
There is only a limited amount of water available on Fort
Ord. However, there is expected to be enough water for approximately
6,000 new units, which is what is the Sierra Club settlement would
allow. The question is how many of these homes will be affordable
to ordinary income families in Monterey County? While developing
more water might provide more opportunities for more affordable
housing, there will be water for 6,000 new housing units on Fort
Ord, and Congress Member Farrs recommended policy would
guarantee that about 3,000 of those would be affordable. Scarcity
of water is simply not an issue, with respect to Congress Member
Farrs proposed policy. Its a larger issue, and an
important one, but should not influence the vote on the Farr policies
at all.
- Affordable
Housing Is A Regional Problem Affordable
Housing is definitely a regional problem. Thats
one reason that FORA should adopt a strong affordable housing
policy. FORA is, in fact, a kind of regional agency,
which encompasses the territory of a number of local governments.
FORA has both the power and the responsibility to set an appropriate
standard for affordable housing on the former Fort Ord. The
failure of some other agency or government to act is no excuse
for FORA to do the same.
- Implementation
Can Be Accomplished Without Undue Delay
Congress Member Farr makes seven specific policy recommendations,
and then provides, in his recommendation #8, for the FORA staff
to return with a specific implementation program for each of them.
This seems eminently workable. The basic job of the Board
of Directors is to provide policy direction for the
authority, outlining the objectives they want FORA to achieve.
The staff can bring back an implementation program without
significant delay, once the appropriate policy direction is given.
If (and this is certainly a possibility) the implementation of
the policy recommendations will require an amendment of the Fort
Ord Reuse Plan, that can also be accomplished with relative dispatch.
While environmental review is certainly required, it seems
unlikely that any of the policy recommendations made by Congress
Member Farr would result in the need for a new EIR, since they
make no changes whatsoever in either the number or location of
housing units provided for in the current plan.
- The
Affordable Housing Policies Advance The Basic Mission of FORA
The main task of base conversion and reuse
was to replace the lost economic support provided by the Army
with a new set of economic opportunities. As FORA Board Members
know, in order for new and existing businesses to grow and survive
in Monterey County, affordable and workforce housing is an absolute
requirement. Teachers and staff at CSUMB, for instance, cannot
afford homes that begin at $525,000. They need a guarantee
that at least some new housing will be provided at the moderate
and workforce income levels. Adoption of Congress
Member Farrs recommendations will play a key role in helping
FORA to achieve its economic development mandate.
Conclusion
LandWatch
strongly supports the integrated set of recommendations made to
you by Congress Member Farr.
cc:
Members, LandWatch Board of Directors
Congress Member Sam Farr
Interested Persons
[Return
to Fort Ord Issues and Actions]
A
PDF version of this file is available here:
070503foraaction.pdf
(139K)
PDF files can be viewed and printed with the Free Acrobat Reader software that you can download at the Adobe website.
|
posted
07.05.03
|