Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-13 City Council (8)City of Pa|o Alto C ty Manager’s Report TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:OCTOBER 13, 1998 CMR:393:98 SUBJECT:AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVE ON NOVEMBER BALLOT RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council consider supporting "Measure A," the Affordable Housing Initiative, on the November 3, 1998 Santa Clara County (County) ballot. BACKGROUND Measure A was placed on the ballot by unanimous vote of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors on August 4, 1998. The Board of Supervisors placed the initiative on the ballot only in fifteen municipalities and the unincorporated urban service areas of the County. Measure A requires a simple majority vote to pass countywide. However, the measure will not become effective in any jurisdiction where a majority of the local electorate votes against it. Measure A would provide voter authority, under Article 34 of the California Constitution, for the construction of approximately 520 units per year of publicly funded, affordable rental housing within the jurisdictions approving the ballot measure. The exact wording of.the initiative is shown below and is also included in the attached Board of Supervisors resolution as Attachment A: "ARTICLE XXXIV AUTHORIZATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF HOUSING Without increasing local taxes, may publicly assisted providers develop, subject to local zoning and approval procedures, rental housing for the elderly, disabled, families and individuals of low income, in the municipalities and urban service areas within Santa Clara County, in annual amounts which, apart from any existing authority for the development of such housing, do not exceed 1/10 of 1% of the total housing units within the municipalities and urban service areas as of the 1990 census ?" ClVIR:393:98 Page 1 of 5 Article 34 was added to the California Constitution in 1950 as a result of citizen opposition to federally funded,~ public.housing projects being developed at that time by many local housing authorities. It requires that voter approval be obtained before any State public body develops, constructs or acquires a low rent housing project. In 1976, the California Supreme Court (California Housing Finance Agency v. Elliott, 17 Cal.3d 575), significantly broadened the application of Article 34 to include privately owned and developed low-income rental housing assisted by a state or local public agency, if there is substantial involvement by the public agency in the project such as providing financing, reviewing and approving design and construction plans, restricting rents and occupancy, supervising construction and monitoring operations and budgets. Certain exemptions to Article 34 were enacted into law after the Elliott decision or have been created by case law over time. These exemptions, combined with the lack of State housing funding, have resulted in .Article 34 being less of a barrier to housing production than in the past. However, should the State of California ever provide any significant funding for rental housing, then the importance of Article 34 authority would increase. When an Article 34 election is held, local jurisdictions usually seek general authority from the voters for development of a maximum number of low-income rental units with the specific locations, timing and project size and type to be subject to the community’s normal land use review process. The California Supreme Court has upheld the use of general elections such as the Measure A initiative. Voters inthe County have approved Article 34 measures in the past. Specific housing projects were authorized in Gilroy and Campbell in the 1980’s, and general authority was approved in Santa Clara in 1988 and in San Jose in 1994. DISCUSSION This ballot initiative is part of the County’s recent efforts to address the area’s identified need for affordable housing. ~ The enactment of Measure A would not affect or alter the public review process under each jurisdiction’s land use and zoning regulations. The initiative is worded so that additional Article 34 authority is added each year and that unused authority would carry over to future years. In addition to sponsoring Measure A, the County,with..the strong support of business groups and housing advocates, has also facilitated the creation of a countywide housing trust fund and pledged.S2 million in general fund revenues for the fund. The passage of Measure A would encourage affordable rental housing development by removing legal uncertainties. The housing trust fund, if successful, will provide a new source of local funding. The Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group is leading the Measure A campaign. A professional campaign manager has been hired and efforts are underway to raise $150,000 to promote the initiative. A sample ~poll of voters in each city has been conducted and this information will be used to focus the campaign’s limited resources most effectively. The CMR:393:98 Page 2 of 5 polling indicated that the initiative could pass in San Jose, Milpitas and Campbell. Palo Alto is one of four, "swing vote" cities (Santa Clara, Cupertino and Los Altos are the other three) where the campaign intends to concentrate its efforts. Organized groups which have participated in these efforts and have endorsed Measure A include the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, Housing Action Coalition, League of Women Voters, IBM Corporation and the Council of Churches. From information available to staff, there appears to be no organized opposition to Measure A. An individual has filed a ballot argument opposing Measure A on the grounds that it does not do enough to solve the County’s housing problems and does not provide the funds to build new housing. Passage of an Article 34 measure could assist in implementation of Palo Alto’s housing policies and programs by providing more flexibility for the City in the implementation of affordable housing programs and in regulation of use and occupancy of the projects funded by the City. Due to the high cost of land and construction, low-income rental housing development in Palo Alto has historically involved local assistance such as the contribution of public land, supplemental local funding and special land use entitlements. Palo Alto has also taken a more active role than most localities in addressing affordable housing requirements through the private market with the Below Market Rate (BMR) program. While the normal 10 percent BMR requirement would not trigger Article 34 questions, some agreements proposed by developers involving off-site rental apartment units could present legal issues. With the City’s close cooperative relationship with local housing nonprofit developers, the line between activities which trigger the need for Article 34 authority and those that are exempt can become blurred. One of the most commonly used exemptions from Article 34 is for the public agency to limit its low-income occupancy restrictions to no more than 49 percent of the units in a project. This can present a problem with other housing funding programs. For example, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) regulations require that at least 51 percent of the units in a rental housing project assisted with CDBG funds be occupied by low-income tenants. With the passage of Measure A, localities providing assistance to low-income rental housing would have greater flexibility in the form of local assistance, the sources of funding and the extent of local occupancy restrictions rather than being constrained by concerns about possible challenges under Article 34 provisions. The City’s controls on rental housing development through its zoning ordinance and the design review process would not be altered or limited by passage Measure A. Additionally, the lack of available sites and the high price of residential land combine to ensure that low- income housing developers come to the City for financial assistance, as well as land use entitlements. Since the mid-1970’s, the City has been financially involved in every low- income housing project developed in Palo Alto. Staff believes it is extremely unlikely that the passage of Measure A would result in the development of any low-income rental housing in Palo Alto that did not meet the City’s standards. CMR:393:98 Page 3 of 5 ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Council could choose not to take any formal action on this matter. If the Council determines that it is important to preserve the right of the electorate to authorize on a case- by-case basis those low-income housing projects subject to Article 34, then it would be appropriate to oppose Measure A. RESOURCE IMPACT Council taking a position on this ballot measure would not have any direct impacts on City resources. If the measure is approved and becomes effective in Palo Alto, then there would be a lower probability of potential legal challenges to the City’s provision of financial assistance supporting low-income rental housing, which would reduce potential legal expenses to defend any such challenges. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This report does not represent any change tO existing City policies. Council endorsement of Measure A would further Policy H-6 of the Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan which states: "Policy H-6: Support the reduction of governmental and regulatory constraints to the production of affordable housing." TIMELINE If Measure A is passed, the initial amount of Article 34 authority would be available for housing units approved during calendar year 1999. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This action is not a project under the California Environmental.Quality Act (CEQA). ATTACHMENTS A. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara Passed on August 4, 1998 B. Ballot Arguments on Measure A - C. Flyers on Measure A - From the Yes on A Campaign and the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto PREPARED BY: Catherine Siegel, Housing Coordinator DEPARTMENT ANNE CRONIN MOORE Interim Director of Planning and.Community Environment CMR:393:98 Page 4 of 5 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL.’~, ~ ~._~& EMILY HARRISON Assistant City Manager County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group League of Women Voters of Palo Alto Palo Alto Housing Corporation CIVlR:393:98 Page 5 of 5 Attachment A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CALLING AND PROVIDING FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE STATEW[DE GENERAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 3, 1998 TO OBTAIN VOTER APPROVAL FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE XXXIV OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION WHEREAS, exlremely low rental housing vacancy rates and rapidly rising market rents recent yeaxs, in combination with the conversion of HUD subsidized housing to market rate status are creating a critical need for additional affordable housing in Santa Clara County; and WHEREAS, there are fii~een (15) incorporated municipalities in Santa Clara County; and WHEREAS, Government Code secdon 56080 designates "urban service areas" as land "within the si3here of influence of a city, which is served by urban facilities, utilities, and services..."; and WHEREAS, housing and employment markets extend beyond .the boundaries of incorporated and unincorporated communities throughout the County of Santa Clara, and in particular to the unincorporated "urban service areas"; and WHEREAS, the need for affordable housing in appropriate locations exists in this County, in particular in the cities and in the "urban service areas"; .and , WHEREAS, Article XXXIV of the California Constitution requires that certain categories of "low rent" housing development receive advance authorization by the voters of the city, town or cOunty/where the development is proposed to be located; and / WHEREAS, an assessment of the extent of citizen suppo .rt in Santa Clara County jurisdictions for affordable housing development requiting local voter authorization pursuant to Article XXXIV is most efficiently conducted in all the local areas as opposed to one area at a time; and ’ ’ WHEREAS, coordinated consideration of Article XXXIV authority for affordable rental housing in the County "urban service areas" and the incorporated municipalities recognizes the reality of employment and housing markets which cross boundaries of incorporated and unincorporated communities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 56080, which recognizes that urban service areas are within the sphere of influence of a city, and thus the Board of Supervisors recognizes that they are much like a city for the purposes of this housing development measure pursuant to Article XXXIV; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors desires to submit to the registered voters of the f’~een municipalities and the "urban service areas" of the County of Santa Clara, at a Special Election to be consolidated with the statewide General Election to be held on November 3, 1998, the opportunity to grant voter authorization as required under Article XXXIV of the California Constitution, for the . development, construction or acquisition of certain categories of"low rent" housing developments; and WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9140 permits the Board of Supervisors to submit to the voters, without a petition, an ordinance for the repeal, amendment, or enactment of any ordinance. The ordinance shall be voted upon at any succeeding regular or special election, and, if it receives a majpdty of the votes cast, the ordinance shall be repealed, amended, or enacted accordingly; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara.seeks the opinion of the registered voters of the t’~een municipalities and the "urban service areas" of the County of’ Santa Clara on the following matter: ARTICLE XXXIV AUTHORIZATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF HOUSING "Without increasing local taxes, may publicly assisted providers develop, subject to local zoning and approval procedures, rental housing /for the elderly, disabled, families and individuals of low income, in the municipalities and urban service areas within Santa Clara County, in annual amounts which, apart from any e~sting authority for the development of such housing, do not exceed 1/10.of 1% of the total hous~Kunitswithin ’ WHEREAS, if housing units which require voter approval under Article XXXIV" of the California Constitution are not deyeloped in any calendar year in the full amount authorized under this ballot measure, additional housing may be built in one or more later years so long.as the cumulative total of housing authorized under this ballot measure does not exceed the total of all years’ authorized annual amounts. The flu’st authorized annual amount shall be for units approved during calendar year 1999, and later years’ amounts shall be for subsequent calendar years; and -2- WHEREAS, the h zag allowed under this ballot measurt : all be in addition to my housing authorized under Article XXXIV, before or after the adoption of this ballot measure, by the registered voters of any city withia the County or within the unincorporated areas of the County; and WHEREAS, the total number of units for low income households authorized each year in the municipalities and the urban service areas by this ballot measure is 1/10 of I% of the total number of housing units of all types in the County as of the 1990 Census, with the unused amount of this annual or accrued total available for use within each jurisdiction of the County, without limitation, within which the legal authority exists under Article XXXIV. The County of Santa Clara shall assume responsibility for determining the utilization of the authority for housing development to be provided by this ballot measure and informing local officials of outstanding aggregate authority which may be available for any projects proposed in their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, if’this ballot measure is determined to be unenforceable in part, or ineffective in any city or part of the County, all enforceable parts of this ballot measure shall remain effective, and the measure shall remain effective in as many municipalities and urban service areas in the County as possible. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara does hereby resolve as follows: A special election shall be held and consolidated with the general statewide election to take place on November 3, 1998, pursuant toPart 3, Division 10, commencing with section 10400 of the Elections Code relating to consolidation of elections, to sul~mit to the registered voters of the fifteen municipalities and the "urban service areas" within the County of Santa Clara the ballot measure set forth above. The urban service areas are designated, in the aggregate, as within the sphere of influence of the cities of this County to be considered to be as part of the municipalities, for the purposes of this measure only. / / The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and content required by law. The Chair of the Board of Supervisors, or her designee, shall sign the ballot argument in the ballot pamphlet. .. The election precincts, polling places, voting booths and election official in each of the ¯ precincts shall, to the extent practicable, be the same as provided for in the statewide election on said date, as prescribed by the ordinance or other act of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Cl.ara, providing for or giving notice of such other election andwhlch sets forth precincts, voting booths, polling places and election officials. -3- PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara, State of CalLfornia, on August 4, 1998, by the following vote:’ AYES:Supervisors NOES:Supervisors ABSENT:Supervisors ATTEST:PHYLLIS A. PEREZ, Clerk BLANCA ALVARADO, Chairperson Board of Supervisors Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: ANN M]LLER. RAVEL, County Counsd Attachment B ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF MEASURE A Please join us in voting YES for Measure A - the lnltiative fiw Affordable Homes. Measure A removes barriers to providing affordable homes for senior citizens, the disabled and working families throughout Santa Clara County - without raising any new taxes or fees~ Today, Santa Clara County residents suffer from a rental housing vacancy rate of under four percent. The average rent for people searching for a two-b¢droom, one-bathroom aparlment exccu’n:ls $1,200 per month, The waiting list for a~brdable rental homes in Santa Clara County is more than 3,000 names long, with an anticipated waiting time of three to five years. These high rents are out of reach for thousands of senior citizens, the disabled, school teachers, police officers, fire fighters, service providers, and a whole host of other working families in our communities. That’s why concerned church, environmental, high-tech, neighta~rhood and community leaders all support Measure A. Your YES vote for Measure A elimiuates red tape and helps provide a positive climate to build mort: homes affordable to arearesidents. Specifically, your YES vote will help a~ct~mplish the following: Measure A helps provide more afibrdable homes without raising taxes or fees. M~sure A allows an additional 520 affordable rental homes to b¢ built each year ia Santa Clara County. Measure A streamlines the process to provide affordable homes while still n~’qulring public review and input for each proposed development before each city’s planning commission and city ouncil. Measure A retains each city’s land use authority to ensure Io~:al citizen input and control. A YES vote for Measure A will help to ensure that our senior citizens, our kids and our co- workers are not priced right out of Silicon Valley, Join us in voting YES for Measure A, and YES for the future of our region. For more information, please visit our web site at www,svmg:og. Ballot Signatories: ’ Murphy Sabattnn Fo~md;r &Form¢r Pn~idcntSanta Clara County Taxpayers Asso~iatio~ Reverend Vaughn g. Beckman Fosc~:utiv¢ Dirr~lor Council ot’Chur~h~s ~’or Santa Clara County Brian "l’easkow.~ki Vice President IBI~ Crownie gillik, Chairperson L©agu~s el" Women Voter~ Sanla Clara Coun~ Council William Amopp F, xecutiw Dh,~:ttw Silicon Valley I l~,bitat ftw Flulnanity ,ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE A This measure may give voters the false impression-that much is being done for persons and families who cannot afford to rent or buy homes in Santa Clara County. Actually, this measure would authorize the establishment of only some 540 units of subsidized rental housing each year - a drop in the bucket. A "no" vote on this measure could be used to send the message to elected officials that voters want real, large-scale solutions to the rental and ownership housing crunch - not just token projects helping only a handful of AUG 1 3 1998 DWIGHT M. ~EGIS I’HA~ REGISTRAR OF VOTERS COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE A We, as voters, should keep ~ mind that most measures are placed on the ballot by self-servkng incumbent politicians or special interest groups. Measures A-F are proposed by the S-member Board of Supervisors for Santa Clara County. The argument in favor of Measure A implies that it would solve the houskng crisis for "senior citizens, the disabled and workkng families." In lxuth, Measure A would, not create any. bopsine f.or anyone. Measure A only asks voters to give their approval, required under the California Constitution (Article 34), for any "low rent housing project" in their local jurisdiction. Article 34 defines "low rent housing project" as one involving some government subsidy or loan guarantee.. Under Measure A, the maximum number of units that might be bulk is based on a formula which currently would total 540 per year. How these units would be funded, and to what extent they would be subsidized by taxpayers, is left to future decision-making by locally elected officials. What we need is a plan for MORE HOUSING, LESS DEMAND, OR BOTH. We also need to try preserving the quality of living here. The Santa Clara Valley is not just a huge, natural resource to be used by big business. It is a place where people live. We need elected officials - at every level - working on solutions. The 540 units of subsidized rental homing "approved" (but not funded) by Measure A would do very little. M Attorney at Law Rebu~ I to Argument Opposing ~.~.easure A Measure A is a significant step forward in removing barriers to providing affordable homes for senior citizens, the disabled and many working families throughout Santa Clara County - without raising any new taxes or fees. Silicon Valley is awash with high rents, little vacancies and long waiting lists for affordable rental homes. ’l’hcse factors force many working people, including our local schoolteachers, firfighters, and police officers, to live far away from the communities in which they serve. Your YES vote on Measure A will help to resolve these problems. " Measure A simply eliminates red tape and provides a more positive climate in which to build aflbrdable homes for the County’s residents. In addition, approving Measure A will help to accomplish the following: o Measure A allows an additional 520 affordable rental homes to be built each year in Santa Clara County. Measure A streamlines the process m provide aflbrdable homes while still requiring full public review and input before each city’s planning commission and city council for each proposed development. Measure A retains each city’s authority over land u~e and ensures local citizens’ input and control. Measure A does not rais~ any new taxes or fees. Providing a long-term solution to Silicon Valley’s need for affordable homes requires a collaborative effort of concerned community and neighborhood leaders, high-tech industry, churches, environmentalists, and local gow.’xnment. That is why we have come together and invite you to join us in supporting Measure A, Murphy Sabatino Founder & Former President Santa Clara County Tax Payer Association Reverend Vaughn F. Beckman Executive Director Council of Churches of Santa Clara County Brian Truskowski Vice President IBM Corporation Crownie Billik League of Women Voters,. Santa Clara County Council William Amopp Executive Director Silicon Valley Habitat for Humanity AUG 2 4 1998 DWI~HT M. BEATTIE YES ON 3IF.ASURE A Attachment C 226 Airimrt Parkway, Suite 190 San .Jose, CA 95110 Phone: 408/501-7859 Fax: 408/501-7861 E-malh MeasureA@svmg.org MEASURE A THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVE SANTA CLARA COUNTY BALLOT NOVEMBER 3, 1998 FACTSHEET Background: The lack of affordable rental housing continues to be a top concern of Silicon Valley residents, employees and employers. Today, Santa Clara County suffers from avacancy rate in rental housing of less than three percent, and the average rent on a two-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment exceeds $1,200 per month. In addition, the waiting list for affordable rental housing is more than 3,000 names long, according to the Housing Authority of Santa Clara County. Measure A - the Affordable Housing Initiative - is a positive step forward in removing the barriers to building rental housing affordable to working families, senior citizens and the disabled. Measure A will appear on the ballot in Santa Clara County on the November 3 election. Specifically, the Affordable Housing Initiative allows voters in all 15 Santa Clara County cities to waive the restrictions of"Article 34," an arcane Constitutional’Amendments incorporated in the early 1950’s to block the construction of affordable rental housing. Article 34 blocks housing by requiring that affordable rental housing proposals that receive a certain percentage of public funding must first receive a vote - for each individual project- of the entire city electorate in which the project is proposed. This extra level of uncertainty and bureaucratic hurdle has served to essentially kill projects from ever being proposed. The Affordable Housing Initiative The Affordable Housing Initiative would provide a countywide approach to addressing the housing crisis. Without raising taxes and retaining each city’s land use authority, Measure A removes a barrier to constructing’affordable rental housing in Silicon Valley cities. Specifically, the Affordable Housing Initiative would accomplish the following: Allows an additional 52._._Q0 affordable rental homes to be built each year in Santa Clara County.. Helps streamline the process to provide affording housing without raising taxes or creating new fees. Provides more certainty to developers who wish to build affordable rental housing by removing the citywide vote requirement for each individual project, while still allowing the same community input at planning commissions and city councils as any .other affordable or market rate housing proposal. Retains ~ach local jurisdiction’s land use entitlement and funding provisions as established by the respective city’s decision-making process. Does not raise taxes or fees. Requires a countywide vote to be approved, while also requiring a majority vote in each city in order to be enacted in that particular city. For more information, please call Leslee Coleman at the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group at (408) 501-7864, or Darren Seaton, campaign manager for Measure A at (408) 501-7859. Citizens |br Quali~y Home~ - Committee for Measure A FPPC ID #981958 .: 1 l-ll: LI:Ab U ~ OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PALO ALTO 457 KINGSLEY AVENUE ¯PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94301 ° 415/327-9148 MEASURE A m THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVE Measure A, the Affordable Housing Initiative, was placed on the November 3, 1998 ballot by unanimous vote of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. Before public funds can be used for affordable housing, Article 34 of the California Constitution requires a vote of the electorate. Measure A responds to that demand. The serious lack of affordable housing in our region is well known. Article 34 in the state constitution brings an extra level of uncertainty to developing affordable rental housing. This has killed some proposals and even made funding of non- profit housing corporation developments more difficult. Measure A reads as follows: Authorization for Development of Certain Categories of Housing Without increasing local taxes or fees, may publicly assisted providers develop, subject to local zoning and approval procedures, rental housing for the elderly, disabled, families and individuals of low income, in jurisdictions withinsanta Clara County, in annual amounts county-wide which, apart from any existing authority for the development of such housing, do not exceed 1/10 of 1% of the total housing units in the County of Santa Clara as of the 1990 census? The Santa Clara County Council of Leagues of Women Voters urges a "YES" vote on Measure A, based on our League housing positions. Crownie Billik, League County Council Chair, has signed the ballot argument in support. Other ballot signatories include a former president of the Santa Clara County Taxpayers Association, the Council of/ Churches of Santa Clara County, IBM Corporation,and Silicon Valley Habitat for Humanity. Measure A is supported by the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, Housing Action Coalition, the Affordable Housing Network of Santa Clara County, and many other groups and citizens. This election does no~ make land use or tax decisions. It does get past the constitutional hurdle of requiring voter approval before public funds can bemused to develop affordable housing. It does not affect rental units which have previously been authorized for development by elections in certain cities. Measure A requires a simple majority vote to pass. would accomplish the following: Approval *Eliminate red tape and help provide a positive climate for building affordable rental homes. Allow an additional 500 units of afforda~~e rental housing each year in.Santa Clara County. Retain each local city’s land use and funding provisions as established by its normal decision-making process through architectural review commissions, planning commissions and city councils. Provide more certainty to developers who wish to build affordable rental housing. Retain local citizen input and local control. The Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group has been asked by the County Board of Supervisors to lead the Measure A campaign. Brochuresurging a "YES" vote will be available. We need active energetic support to get out the vote in all urban areas of the county. This November, we can take a big step towards solving our housing crisis. Sally Probst LWV Palo Alto (650) 327-9116 September 5, 1998