|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Do you believe the state should make one-size-fits-all land-use decisions in Pleasanton?
Do you believe Sacramento laws should allow developers to tear down the house next door to build a multi-story and multi-unit building in your neighborhood? Without City Council review or approval, or input from you or your neighbors? State laws now allow this, and currently there is nothing your City Council can do to help you.
I am honored to have been twice elected to the Pleasanton City Council. I promised that when I was elected I would work to stand up for Pleasanton’s quality of life. I have worked very hard to do so. We can welcome new neighbors and abundant diversity without sacrificing what is wonderful about our community.
We are not against housing; we want housing located where it makes sense for our community. We want housing that is affordable to our public servants, teachers, nurses, auto mechanics — not just more market-rate housing.
California’s population is declining, state housing goals have been proven wrong, numbers must be realistic. We want a say in what is built, how it’s built, and how we will pay for the new services/infrastructure growth requires; it shouldn’t be paid by existing homeowners.
Over 100 laws like Senate Bill 35 (which allows the five-story project with no parking in our downtown) have taken away the right of local elected officials to shape housing policy.
The Pleasanton City Council voted to support Our Neighborhood Voices, a ballot initiative that, when passed by the voters of the state, will take back local authority by way of a constitutional amendment. It will affirm the state of California constitution (“home rule”) a longstanding practice which gives local municipalities authority of land-use and zoning.
It does not eliminate state laws; it neutralizes those new state laws that allow for-profit developers to ignore local communities. That is democracy in action!
Pleasanton produced 300% of our market-rate housing mandates from the last housing cycle. However, the state’s narrative blames cities for the state’s housing affordability problems. But it was Sacramento that created the problem by eliminating the funds we once used to help build affordable housing.
Affordable housing requires subsidies to build, Pleasanton needs $2-3 billion to satisfy the unfunded state affordable housing mandates. That money does not exist; the state doesn’t have it, and neither does Pleasanton. Cities have been set up to fail, so when we do … for-profit developers are given the keys to our city.
Massive new growth of expensive housing will not create affordability. Cities like Vancouver, B.C. and Austin, Texas and others that have allowed massive up-zoning and unfettered luxury housing development have become more expensive — not less. The prestigious Urban Institute did a comprehensive study on the effects of up-zoning efforts across America and found these efforts did not lower the cost of housing at all. Zero percent!
Follow the money, understand political agendas and special interests motivated by profit. Powerful forces work to undermine those who stand in their way. Know that Pleasanton residents are the priority in every decision that I make.
Please join me and the growing statewide movement of local leaders and neighbors who are fighting to bring back neighborhood voice in community planning. Stand up Pleasanton!
Editor’s note: Julie Testa is serving her second term on the Pleasanton City Council, currently representing District 3. Testa was part of the 3-2 majority to vote in favor of supporting the Our Neighborhood Voices draft initiative on June 6. More information about the initiative proposal can be found at OurNeighborhoodVoices.com.
Editor’s note: Julie Testa is serving her second term on the Pleasanton City Council, currently representing District 3. Testa was part of the 3-2 majority to vote in favor of supporting the Our Neighborhood Voices draft initiative on June 6. More information about the initiative proposal can be found at OurNeighborhoodVoices.com.
Even though I’m ticked off at Julie and the rest of the Council for destroying the west side with massive development, she is absolutely right in this case. The plans for affordable housing by the state forcing cities to rezone properties is a fantasy. This is all about market-rate housing for tech workers and other affluent people. It’s a scam by state legislators in the pocket of the tech industry and developers. This has led to part of what has happened on the west side, but Julie is the only one on the Council who has fought back. There has been a lot of talk by PW posters and other politicos about avoiding the so-called mistakes of past Councils by fighting the state and losing lawsuits. But at least we fought for the democratic process and didn’t cave in to state overreach and mandates. The people advocating for these state policies are just as much in the pocket of big-money interests as the forces in Sacramento are.
I’m looking forward to voting out the current batch of unserious city council members. If this guest opinion is any indicator of their regard for voters, they cannot be gone too soon.
Get ready for another lawsuit Council Member Testa. The state sued the City before and their deep pockets can and will do it again. Thanks for nothing Julie.
I am for housing that fits the neighborhood setting. The city should have a say. However we should not have the State (Sacramento) or County dictate what we can or cannot do within our city limits. There has been too much politics here. From reading the piece, I am not sure where Councilwoman Tesla stands. I see 2 different views being expressed. We need someone to stand with one principle and defend it. We cannot waffle depending on the issue at hand. We as residents of Pleasanton need to understand the issue as well as the overall housing issue. If we only read what we want to read or hear what we need to hear, we will be dubbed by the politicians again! Fool me once, fool me twice and there is no third time.
Ian, I second your opinion. The current board, collectively, is an embarrassment: disrespectful of one another, self aggrandizing and utterly lack moving our city toward the future. Forget about housing, but the fact that this council could not agree to have a simple “stage or amphitheater” built for Friday night summer concerts is embarrassing. People from all over the TriValley come to enjoy these concerts and what do they see representing Pleasanton? A tacky slab of concrete with four poles holding up string lights. If this “stage” can’t be agreed upon and improved by the current council nothing else will be.
Julie Testa was reelected by her constituents for her slow growth preference. She even tried demanding how the School District could develop their available land near downtown. But she gives no explanation why she voted to shut down the improvements of our downtown park, or how the contaminated well water situation the City is facing will be addressed. Nothing new on this opinion piece.
Let’s at least be honest… The state wasn’t Pleasanton’s Boogey Man until we thought we were better than our neighboring communities and voted for an Illegal Housing Cap… And Five Story Housing Developments are the only things that make sense under the recent Downtown Specific Plan Update… Nobody is picking on us… we brought this on ourselves!
This is a bad take. Pleasanton for decades underinvested in housing. Now the state is forcing the cities hand. This town will become a retirement community, for those who bought in decades about. If the city council had its way. I for one am very happy the state is forcing Pleasanton’s hand.
Todays housing is the result of imbalance between jobs created and housing units developed. Its not just the problem of Plesanton, its entire bay area. Do you know that Pleasanton city collects about ~$200k+ various fees to make family home of ~2000sqft. Add to that the land cost, engineering cost etc. Before putting first stone, a builder can easily incur ~$500k per SFR. Builders hardly make any money with all city red tape (not just Pleasanton), labor costs and big fees. Most of small builders are moved to profitable remodeling. You can’t make any money unless you are a big builder doing a decent size project. With today’s cost, you are lucky if you can build any thing for less than a $1.5M SFR. The only way is to ask the companies to move away so that demand for housing reduces. Every city wants companies/jobs in their boundary and let the housing be some other city problem, and the zoning policies were evolved around this fantasy. Net result, all the bay area became housing shortage. State just woke up recently, as cities are still unable to address housing issue. When companies create 1000 jobs, brace for 1000 houses more or less. If you are unable to plan for that, let some one do that planning, for you. This is what state is doing. Please see the big picture. Don’t follow blindly.