Editor,
The city recently mailed a flyer to residents titled, “An update.” However, the title should read “The city measure to replace Measure Y.” The flyer fails to mention Measure Y, approved by the voters in 2020, in any form.
Editor,
The city recently mailed a flyer to residents titled, “An update.” However, the title should read “The city measure to replace Measure Y.” The flyer fails to mention Measure Y, approved by the voters in 2020, in any form.
Under Measure Y, we meet our current housing requirements to 2031 (7,015 units). Our housing element says, “However, even within the confines of Measure Y, this housing element clearly demonstrates that the city’s existing zoning has capacity for over 10,000 housing units, which achieves its RHNA targets in each category with buffers.”
Measure Y expires in 2030 allowing the city to meet the state mandated housing requirements to 2040 (an additional 15,000 units). It will cost $250,000 to put this measure on the ballot.
Other major issues that were omitted or misstated in the flyer are: Developers are using state law to circumvent Measure Y, so the city does not have local control as claimed, the new measure will increase the height and densities of commercial buildings too, the flyer is subtitled as a “potential” measure, yet, recently the City Council committed to placing a measure to eliminate Measure Y on the November 2024 ballot. The City Council plans to adopt the ballot language on July 15, 2024. Lastly, the promise of no new taxes is debatable and other funding sources may be needed to accommodate the increase in housing development.
The lack of transparency and the selective focus of this flyer has served to undermine the trust of residents in our community. It is beyond discouraging, especially considering the importance of policy decisions at hand.
Lisa Maley
San Mateo
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(2) comments
This is a very informative LTE and I truly appreciate you making us aware. I will not support the city's plan to undo Measure Y to enable developers to overbuild and ruin our beautiful city. I urge everyone to stand up against this waste of taxpayer money poison pill city led activity. Just Say No to Overbuilding.
What’s concerning about this are those who are in the pockets of developers telling our most vulnerable families that this will deliver affordable housing. Several residents spoke passionately at Monday’s City Council meeting about earmarking 25% of housing as affordable, with an additional 20% earmarked for the very poorest of families. Will this happen under the proposed ballot measure? Absolutely not. Will the literature keep touting affordable housing as a benefit? You bet they will! We need to call them out each and every time, as affordable housing is a real need, and building “mixed use” office and luxury housing with a tiny percentage of affordable housing is not what we need but it is what we will get if this measure passes.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.