The County of Monterey’s first stab at its housing plan is questionable at best.

Pam Marino here, left scratching my head as I’ve been digging into the County of Monterey’s draft 2023-2031 Housing Element, released just last week. I’m not the only one: Critics are starting to point out deficiencies in the 985-page element, which is the County’s plan to encourage more housing construction in unincorporated areas.

Two critics—Landwatch Monterey County and Carmel Valley Association—have already sent letters ahead of tomorrow’s Monterey County Planning Commission meeting, the public’s first opportunity to hear a summary of the draft element.

I found some of the draft’s proposals baffling. Here’s an analogy for just one.

Imagine for a moment that you’re ill and the doctor tells you to take three pills and call them in the morning. But you take 10, thinking, “more is better, right?” Of course the answer is no, because taking the prescribed amount is therapeutic. Taking too much could send your health into a tailspin.

In the County’s case, the California Department of Housing and Community Development is requiring the county to add 3,326 housing units to the housing element, with 2,190 of those affordable for very low-, low- and moderate-income households. 

County planners added three times the required amount: 10,257. 

Part of the problem is that the planners appear to have relied heavily on the county’s inclusionary housing ordinance in drafting the housing element, an ordinance that dictates that developers provide 20 percent of units as affordable, with the other 80 percent as market rate. 

As it turns out, 2,190 is around 21 percent of 10,257. Did planners simply do the math and expect the inclusionary ordinance to do all the work?

That ordinance, on the books for 45 years, has been a failure. That was the general agreement at a joint meeting last week of the county’s Housing Advisory Committee and Health, Housing and Human Services Committee, which I reported on in our most recent edition of the Weekly. 

As developer Mike Avila told committee members on Monday, May 6, requiring for-profit developers to provide 20 percent affordable housing makes a project nearly impossible to pencil out. “What you get is 100 percent of nothing,” he said. 

In a letter from Landwatch Executive Director Michael DeLapa to Planning Commission Chair Martha Diehl, he argued that including three times the number of units than actually required “will lead to destructive sprawl, excessive VMT (vehicle miles traveled) and greenhouse gas emissions.”

Priscilla Walton, president of the Carmel Valley Association, wrote to Glenn Church, chair of the Board of Supervisors, pointing out that 75 percent of the 10,000 units are proposed for Carmel Valley, and most of those are market rate. The need, she said, is for affordable housing at the mouth of the valley and in the Mid-Valley area.

Also baffling to me is why so many of the possible development sites listed on a site inventory are far away from services and job centers, when the state requires development, especially for affordable units, to be near those necessities. 

The groups found more issues, and their representatives will likely be testifying at tomorrow’s Planning Commission meeting, if you’re interested in hearing what they have to say. You can also hear from county planners on what was included in the draft element.

The meeting begins at 9am inside the Government Center at 168 W. Alisal St., Salinas. You can participate online by clicking here. Or watch on the County’s YouTube Channel, found here. 

If you want to see the draft housing element for yourself, go to bit.ly/MoCoHousingElement. There’s a written public comment period happening now through June 6. Send comments to GeneralPlanUpdates@co.monterey.ca.us.

Read the full newsletter.