Occurring much faster than the voting public may have imagined, mail-in ballots for the Nov. 8 election will be available on Oct. 11.
The SLO City News, having chronicled the entries of six local City Council candidates, and three Mayoral candidates – including one who didn’t make the ballot- sent some choice questions to the eight still vying for leadership.
To keep all the candidates on the same page, figuratively and somewhat literally, we asked them all the same three questions and present their responses in the order the SLO County Clerk Recorder lists them. Voters will be asked to choose one Mayoral Candidate and two of their favorite Council Candidates.
1) What is your “core issue” in running and how would you influence that over the next term?
Heidi Harmon – Office Manager – Mayoral Candidate:
Proactive community engagement is a core issue for me. There’s a sense that the city isn’t listening to residents and doesn’t actively reach out when important decisions are being made. The residents are what makes this city great, and as mayor I will keep the voice and concern of local citizens at the forefront of everything I do. I believe each person deserves respect and the right to be heard. Through community gatherings and other events, your voice will be brought to city decisions, ensuring the direction of SLO reflects our collective vision, rather than the agenda of entrenched interests.
Jan Marx – incumbent Mayor of San Luis Obispo – Mayoral Candidate:
My top priority will be to implement our General Plan, the City’s vision for the future, including the updated Land Use and Circulation Element, Bicycle Master Plan and Climate Action Plan. I will work with the community to bring in new neighborhoods, thus reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen established neighborhoods, increase bicycle paths, expanding open space and improving infrastructure. Facilitating cost saving, clean energy is also crucial.
Mike Clark – Retired Army Officer – Council Candidate:
I will listen to and be a voice for the residents of San Luis Obispo. I will do all that I can to encourage residents to become actively engaged in and aware of what is happening to and what is proposed for our town and their individual neighborhoods. Among other topics, residents must be actively involved in working on our water, traffic, and parking issues, as well as our future development in order to ensure the best possible outcomes. These things are too important to the city’s future health to be left to others to decide for us.
Aaron Gomez – Small Business Owner – Council Candidate
My core issue for wanting to run is making sure that we keep sustainability at the forefront of our decision making and policy setting. I realize that is a large undertaking, but a necessary one. It encompasses environmental stewardship, encouraging economically sustainable business practices, providing housing options for those who work in our city, and continuing to improve access to City Hall through technological advances. My way of influencing that is to be the voice for those needs as we continue to evolve as a community. It is our job to represent the needs of the public.
Christopher Lopez – Student / Community Volunteer – Council Candidate:
Government transparency is one of my core issues. What we need is leadership that is prepared to tackle our challenges, but understands the importance of working with community members to create solutions. My ability to listen and connect with others is what sets me apart from other candidates. Over the next term, I will ask to set higher standards for the council in regards to transparency. I will ensure that we prioritize: openness, accountability, and honesty; because, the community must be able to trust and count on their elected representatives.
Andrea “Andy” Pease – Green Building Architect – Council Candidate:
Improving housing options and affordability: Due to the high cost of housing, our City is losing many people who make up our vibrant community – teachers, artists, firefighters, young families, our adult children returning to town, retirees and many more. In addition, the long commutes are contributing to climate change, increased traffic, hardship on businesses and employees, and lost spending in our City. We need a mix of housing to create more opportunity, in conjunction with multi-modal transportation and a sustainable water supply.
Brett Strickland – Project Leader – Council Candidate:
Housing is a major issue in SLO with impacts on everyone from residents to businesses. In that light the city should not be making it more difficult and expensive to live here, directly or indirectly. That is why the core issue in my campaign is the repeal of the Rental Inspection Ordinance. When elected I will do everything in my power to dismantle said ordinance which has been met with opposition from both landlords and tenants. We already have a program in place that allows anyone to report unsafe living conditions, this new program is unwanted and unnecessary.
Mila Vujovich-La Barre – Teacher – Council Candidate:
As a thoughtful, energetic and forward-thinking community member, I have been involved in City politics as a volunteer for years. Currently we are at a crossroads with a blueprint to maximize development while witnessing the dramatic effects of climate change and an epic drought. As a Council member, I will make sure that any new development is coupled with sufficient water and traffic infrastructure, including Class 1 bike lanes. I will also make sure that our beloved open space and viewsheds are protected.
2) What is the best tactic to expand affordable housing in SLO?
Harmon:
First and foremost, I’ll work with Cal Poly to house a significantly larger percentage of their students on campus. The resulting reduction in demand will lower rental rates for the rest of city residents. I am also in favor of a cap on enrollment if Cal Poly cannot provide adequate housing. Additionally, I’ll work to pass an innovative housing ordinance permitting the construction of small, modest homes and “tiny homes”. We need these creative housing solutions for families, young professionals, and retirees to build neighborhoods we want to come home to. I also oppose the Rental Housing Inspection Program.
Marx:
The City’s affordable housing program is working well. We just added 43 new units and over 50 more are in the approval process. Workforce housing, however, is an urgent issue. The annexation areas, including Avila Ranch and San Luis Ranch afford us the best opportunity to address this pressing need. New neighborhoods need to build workforce housing which is affordable by design, including modest single family homes and apartments. Reserving some housing to owner occupancy could also benefit our long term workforce. I will encourage large employers to partner with developers and housing nonprofits to build infill workforce housing.
Clark:
We have been addressing the symptoms instead of seeking a solution to our housing problems. As long as Cal Poly and Cuesta continue to grow, we can never build our way out of the housing shortage and retain the small town charm, culture and character of SLO. Our collective energies must be focused on making Cal Poly, the Trustees, and/or the state legislature understand that Cal Poly must provide significantly more on-campus housing and place a cap on enrollment. The City of Santa Cruz and its residents were able to effect such changes. Working together we can do so, too.
Gomez:
Approving projects that bring affordable and work force housing in to existence. Partnerships with organizations like HASLO, People’s Self Help Housing, and Transitions Mental Health are one way. Affordable by design projects and owner occupancy deed restrictions. Opening up the possibilities of secondary dwellings on existing properties. A scaled developer fee structure that encourages more affordable units. Possibly implementing a form-based code. On campus housing for college students will also free up homes within the city. It is going to take several solutions not just one. But they have to be solutions, not road blocks.
Lopez:
What I believe could be the best tactic to expand affordable housing in SLO is touched upon in the City of San Luis Obispo’s 2012 Economic Development Strategic Plan which states, “Identify opportunities for permit streamlining with the goal of reducing permit processing times, seeking opportunities to increase internal coordination, and improving cross department focus on development review.” The goal itself is meant to assist in job creation; however, the same theory applies to expanding affordable housing in SLO. Thus, we must address the efficiency in our City’s development review process and create a process that works for everyone.
Pease:
We should continue with inclusionary housing programs for low-income households, while creating housing options that are affordable by design. We need a 4-point approach. – Support Cal Poly’s plan to house 60% of students on campus, in accordance with their Master Plan. – Create more compact infill rental housing by adjusting our zoning, fees and processes to encourage smaller units. – Develop a variety of owner-occupied housing including small single family homes as well as town-homes, courtyard cottages, flats, micro-units with shared amenities and other housing types. – As the options above develop, allow the market to normalize.
Strickland:
The best tactic to increase affordability in the housing market is to incentivize the building of “affordable by design” housing units. The city should be encouraging builders to create smaller, more economical homes. Smaller homes mean smaller price tags. The city can do this by decreasing fees on small-scale construction. Additionally the city should be working to streamline the permitting process as any reduction in time and guess work at the planning stage, can translate into a reduction in cost.
Vujovich-La Barre:
The closure of Diablo Canyon will have an impact on our housing market. In the future, we can maximize affordable housing in San Luis Obispo by revisiting the General Plan to correct some zoning conflicts and adjust some of the lot sizes in areas where infill would be appropriate. Cal Poly needs to build more housing and house more of its students and staff on campus. That goal can be achieved through public/private partnerships with eager developers. We should allow for a few select areas of town to embrace the innovative movement toward “tiny homes.”
3) Up, out and infill – what are the proper strategies to pursue development and how fast?
Harmon:
Any new development must be carefully examined to prevent sprawl, ensure adequate water resources, and protect our open space. From an environmental standpoint I prefer that demand is met through carefully planned infill housing. Rather than developing on agricultural and open space, infill protects our land and reduces car trips, leading to fewer emissions and more walkable communities. We must also ensure that new homes match the needs of the workforce. Regardless of the type, new development must happen slowly, allow for the input of current neighbors, and must always contribute to the charm and character of SLO.
Marx:
The established neighborhoods are concerned about too much infill negatively impacting their quality of life. In my opinion, we are ready for an urban model and more multifamily housing in the Downtown. It will become its own residential neighborhood. We have never reached our growth management 1% per year cap. Because of favorable economic conditions, it appears there is an inordinate amount of housing being developed at once. It is crucial and central to our General Plan that we maintain our urban reserve line, surrounded by a greenbelt. That means more density in the new neighborhoods in the annexation areas.
Clark:
Development should be limited to an annual rate of 1% and phased to allow the needed infrastructure to keep pace with that development. I have serious concerns about our infrastructure (e.g., water service, storm drains, sewer capacity, road capacity) keeping pace with projected growth. We sometimes forget that much of our infrastructure is past or nearing capacity and does or will require substantial investment in maintenance or upgrade. Therefore, we should approach future development cautiously, considering all factors. Density is best addressed in the downtown core and in the new, currently planned residential developments. We must respect our established residential neighborhoods.
Gomez:
Economy has a major influence over how quickly we develop. With SLO’s 1% growth cap, which we have not gotten close to in the past decade, too fast isn’t possible. Including all affordable units, generally left out of calculations per state law, we have still only averaged 0.37% growth. That reality shows us that we have not kept up with job creation. Mix that in with a growing student population and we have a housing shortage and ever rising prices. Proper strategy, get affordable homes built. Using diverse housing types for an area that has limited space.
Lopez:
The City of San Luis Obispo 2014-2019 Housing Element highlights the need to, “support residential infill development and promote higher residential density where appropriate.” I do support this. Up, out, and infill are all proper strategies to consider when pursuing future developments, but must be done, “where appropriate.” We can continue to support infill developments, but also decide how far up we as a community will allow. In regards to timing, we must not build too fast. We must work with Cal Poly, Cuesta, and local developers to better understand the growth our community will face in the future.
Pease:
To mitigate the current jobs-housing imbalance, we need new housing in alignment with our slow-growth cap of 1%. Up – To avoid sprawl, we should make the best use of land within the City, including 3-4 story mixed-use and residential buildings, when compatible with adjacent uses. Out – Current expansion areas will provide new housing options along with open space, parks and bike trails. Further expansion should be limited and in accordance with our greenbelt. Infill – To relieve pressure on our older neighborhoods and historic downtown core, infill can be located at the downtown perimeter and along major corridors.
Strickland:
A combination of “up, out, and infill” should be considered when contemplating the city’s future growth. To leave out any of these options or to only look at one, would be a disservice to the residents. A good representative should consider all options before making a decision, especially one with a lasting impact on the future of the city. Certain areas of the city may be better suited to infill where others would benefit from building out etc. As your Councilman I will consider all options before me and make the best decision possible.
Vujovich-La Barre:
The SLO Land Use Circulation Element (LUCE), funded by a grant to maximize development, recently became part of the General Plan.On the LUCE team were a significant number of professionals that will ultimately financially benefit from proposed development. A LUCE Minority report indicated some members’ frustration with the methodology used and the end result. There was not adequate public input. The need for housing is obvious. We should focus on infill in the blighted areas. Some behemoth empty commercial structures should be reconsidered for work/live options. If there is sufficient water and safety given the growing, vital SLO County Airport, permitted plans should be allowed to go forward.
