Close to Home: No on C: This is a Band-aid Santa Rosa doesn't need

I attended a debate regarding Santa Rosa's Measure C between Council members Tom Schwedhelm and Julie Combs at the Sonoma County Alliance. Both were articulate and defended their positions.

But when asked the role of prior council policy decisions on affordability, both chose to dodge the question.

The lack of affordability did not mysteriously appear but is the result of a lot of community actions.

I was party to a lot of those policy decisions as a planning commissioner and member of the Santa Rosa City Council between 1991 and 2003. While not always agreeing with the direction, the council put in motion decisions that have significantly increased the cost of housing.

The document transfer tax was increased to provide funds for subsidized housing only to be folded into the general fund and used for salaries and benefits.

Urban growth limits were adopted and community separators were supported that reduced the available land for housing and increased the value of the land remaining.

In response, significant density was inserted into land-use planning in support of city-centered growth to be eroded by legal action by the railroad and neighbors. Large areas were returned to lower densities.

Wanting more transparency in the process, additional levels of review were added. The general plan became more a general suggestion than communitywide adopted plan. The result is that it takes much longer to receive approval for a plan in compliance with the general plan.

To address budget issues, the development community became responsible for 100 percent of fees associated with all the permits, review and approval significantly increasing the cost of applications.

New green building codes were adopted to address issues of climate change. That helps the environment but adds cost to the building of units.

Similarly, accessibility warranted modification and costs to accommodate disability.

We developed a state-of-the-art treatment facility for sewer and used the byproduct to produce clean energy in the steam fields. The cost of most of these improvements was allocated to new development, reflected in hefty hookup fees.

We spent time and effort identifying opportunity for housing in both southeast and southwest Santa Rosa, and then the California tiger salamander was identified ss an endangered species, effectively removing all the land from potential development.

But the true elephant in the room is the current homeowner. More than 60 percent of the residences in Santa Rosa are owner-occupied. A combination of an incredible community and a limited stock of housing have resulted in double-digit appreciation for current homeowners. Even losses suffered in 2008, 2009 and 2010 have been restored and then some.

Any discussion of making housing more affordable must start with an acceptance of lower property values. Gov. Jerry Brown was correct when he pointed out that we are not serious about affordability in the North Coast.

I was taught as a child that I could not have everything. I needed to prioritize what was important and work to achieve it. The same holds true for the community. Any conversation about housing must start with an honest and frank conversation about priorities.

I do not believe that Santa Rosa residents are willing to give up their property values; their concern for the environment; their distrust of government; their ability to get around town while putting a strain on our infrastructure that we repeatedly have failed to maintain.

Measure C is another Band-aid policy that will exacerbate the problem. It will provide a benefit to a handful of residents while adding bureaucracy and costs to be borne by others unable to find affordable housing. It may ease the guilt on the part of a council trying to help, but it is bad policy.

Mike Martini, general manager of Taft Street Winery, is a former mayor of Santa Rosa and member of the City Council.