San Jose, California, Measure B, Evergreen Senior Housing Initiative (June 2018)
| Measure B: San Jose Evergreen Senior Housing Initiative |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| June 5, 2018 |
| Status: |
 Defeated
|
| Topic: |
| Local property |
| Related articles |
| Local property on the ballot June 5, 2018 ballot measures in California Santa Clara County, California ballot measures Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot |
| See also |
| San Jose, California |
An initiative to amend the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan, the San Jose municipal code, and the Evergreen East Hills development policy to add a senior housing development project was on the ballot for San Jose voters in Santa Clara County, California, on June 5, 2018. It was defeated.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of amending the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan to rezone employment lands in the city for senior housing, including a senior housing overlay in the Evergreen Campus Industrial Area allowing for up to 910 residential units. |
| A no vote was a vote against amending the Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan and rezoning employment lands for senior housing. |
The initiative was on the ballot with a competing measure, Measure C, which was proposed by Mayor Sam Liccardo and approved by the San Jose City Council. Voters defeated the Measure B initiative to open up employment lands to senior housing projects and approved the Measure C charter amendment to restrict residential development in those areas of San Jose.
Election results
|
San Jose Measure B |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 68,936 | 41.00% | ||
|
|
99,206 | 59.00% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot question
The ballot question was as follows:[1]
| “ |
Shall an initiative measure be adopted: (1)changing San Jose’s General Plan to create a Senior Housing Overlay to allow conversion of land designated for employment use to senior housing citywide; and (2) changing the Evergreen-East Hills Development Policy and Municipal Code, and adding a Specific Plan to allow development of up to 910 residential units on an approximately 200-acre Industrial Site in Evergreen for individuals 55 and over and other qualifying individuals?[2] |
” |
Ballot title and summary
Read the ballot title and summary prepared by the city attorney of San Jose here.
Full text
Read the full text of the measure here.
Background
The Evergreen Senior Housing Initiative was designed to convert employment lands citywide to senior housing and to rezone 200 acres of industrial land as a senior housing overlay in the Evergreen Campus Industrial Area on the east end of the urban growth boundary (see this map).[3]
According to San Jose Inside, real estate developers Carl Berg and Chop Keenan drove the petition effort.[4]
The group San Jose Residents for Evergreen Senior Homes stated on its website, "The project would include up to 910 residential units, at least 20% of which would be designated as affordable, with a preference given to military veterans."[5]
Support
Proponents
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of Measure B:[6]
- Patricia E. Sausedo, former vice mayor and Evergreen council member, city of San Jose
- Sharon Maples, teacher
- Malenia Horn, disabled U.S. Army veteran
- Frank Stanley, retired U.S. postal worker
- James D. Kenny, San Jose resident
Arguments
The following official argument was filed in support of Measure B:[6]
| “ |
Housing costs in San Jose are out of control, but local politicians have given us nothing but talk. Measure B is more than talk - it gives voters the opportunity to help solve our housing crisis by creating housing (with affordable housing) for seniors, including veterans. Measure B allows for the creation of Evergreen Senior Homes, which will have up to 910 residential units for seniors by transforming 200 vacant acres of industrial land that has sat empty for over 30 years into much-needed senior housing. Under current zoning, industrial development would generate significant daily commuter traffic and tall buildings in the Evergreen neighborhood. Measured instead protects the neighborhood and keeps it family focused by rezoning to build senior housing. 20% of the housing created by Measure B would be available at below market rate for seniors. Currently, too many local seniors are struggling to find an affordable home because the City has failed to meet its affordable housing requirements. Additionally, veterans, who have sacrificed so much for our country, would be given preference to the affordable housing — to the fullest extent allowed by law — to honor their service. In addition to creating new housing, Measure B will create a new trail that will be open and available to the public, generating new greenspace for existing and new residents at no cost to taxpayers. And it requires the new housing to meet high water and energy conservation standards, with solar panels and captured storm water runoff to protect the environment. Your "Yes" vote on Measure B is an important step towards solving our housing shortage with new, desperately needed housing for seniors, including affordable units for seniors and veterans. Please join us and thousands of San Jose residents in voting Yes on Measure B.[2] |
” |
| —Official Argument in Support of Measure B | ||
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument in opposition to Measure B:[7]
- Mary Collins, president, League of Women Voters San Jose Santa Clara
- Leslye Corsiglia, affordable housing advocate and executive director, SV@Home
- Megan Medeiros, executive director, Committee for Green Foothills
- Sylvia Arenas, council woman, District 8, city of San Jose
Arguments
The following official argument was filed in opposition to Measure B:[7]
| “ |
Measure B was crafted and funded by wealthy out-of-town developers to exempt themselves from the city's rules. They want to line their pockets by building a gated community of luxury homes and sticking San Jose residents with the bill. The Mercury News has it right: “Evergreen homes initiative isn’t about housing shortage; it’s about greed.” Here’s the truth: Measure B masquerades as affordable housing for seniors and veterans, weakens San Jose’s affordable housing rules, and doesn’t guarantee a single unit of veterans' housing. Measure B also exempts developers from building affordable housing that San Jose currently mandates. Measure B would increase traffic and create sprawl while exempting these developers from paying the traffic impact fees everybody else must pay. Measure B is bad for the environment. It transforms 200 acres of undeveloped hillside into multi-million-dollar homes without environmental review. It also endangers open space citywide, including Coyote Valley’s farmland and wildlife habitat. Measure B doesn’t make fiscal sense, costing San Jose $24.5 million a year. This will strain our police, fire, libraries, and parks, reducing public safety in our neighborhoods. Measure B silences the community and ignores the 5,000+ people who helped to write our general plan. San Jose residents deserve a say on what happens in their neighborhood. That's why every member of the San Jose city council and the mayor are opposed to Measure B. San Jose needs more affordable housing, not gated communities of luxury homes. Make developers pay for their traffic and environmental impacts, not exempt themselves from the city's rules. Join an unprecedented coalition of community leaders and elected officials, Democrats and Republicans, seniors, millennials, environmentalists, veterans, affordable housing advocates, business and faith leaders who oppose Measure B. Measure B was crafted and funded by wealthy out-of-town developers to exempt themselves from the city's rules. They want to line their pockets by building a gated community of luxury homes and sticking San Jose residents with the bill. Vote no on Measure B. Other developers are watching and your neighborhood might be on the ballot next. Find out more at www.NoOnBSJ.com.[2] |
” |
| —Official Argument in Opposition to Measure B | ||
Path to the ballot
Proponents of the initiative filed a notice of intent to circulate a petition to adopt the Evergreen Senior Homes Specific Plan on September 8, 2017. They needed to collect 22,277 valid signatures. On January 10, 2018, the county registrar verified that proponents had collected 30,184 signatures, of which 22,364 were valid, qualifying the initiative to go before the city council. On January 23, 2018, the city council directed the city manager to prepare an impact report on the initiative.[8]
After receiving the impact report, the council voted unanimously (10-0) on March 6, 2018, to place the initiative on the ballot for June 5, 2018.[1]
On March 8, 2018, the city council voted 9-1 to place a competing measure—Measure C—on the ballot. It was proposed by Mayor Sam Liccardo, and council member Donald Rocha cast the opposing vote against Measure C.[9]
See also
|
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 SanjoseCA.gov, "Resolution No. 78523," accessed March 8, 2018
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ SanjoseCA.gov, "Title and Summary," accessed January 23, 2018
- ↑ San Jose Inside, "San Jose Prepares for War with Wealthy Developers on Evergreen Senior Housing Ballot Measure," September 20, 2017
- ↑ Evergreen Senior Homes, "Home," accessed January 23, 2018
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 City of San Jose, "Argument in Favor," accessed May 6, 2018
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 City of San Jose, "Argument in Opposition," accessed May 6, 2018
- ↑ SanjoseCA.gov, "Agenda file no. 18-077," accessed January 23, 2018
- ↑ The Mercury News, "Evergreen counter-measure makes the ballot as developers promise a legal challenge," March 8, 2018
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
