Santa Cruz council authorizes two competing housing measures for the ballot after widespread public comment

The Santa Cruz City Council voted unanimously to place two competing housing measures on the ballot, after more than an hour of public comment and brief council discussion. The council authorized sending both measures to the county clerk; the clerk will decide which appears first on the ballot by a coin toss.

Supporters of the workforce-focused measure urged the council to move the item forward and pushed for clear voter information. “This bond should not only create roofs over people's heads, but also careers under their feet,” said Joe Placentia of the American Carpenters Union Local 646 during public comment. Laz Myman, a Santa Cruz resident and recent UC Santa Cruz graduate, corrected a statement about the proposed tax threshold, saying, “The tax is actually only on every dollar over the $1,800,000 threshold, so it would actually be far lower than that.”

Speakers representing churches, health providers and housing advocates described housing as central to community health and continuity and urged voters to have the choice. “Housing continues to be the number one topic,” said Andrew Golden Krantz, who identified himself as a board member of Santa Cruz Community Health. Bruce Van Allen, a former mayor who manages affordable housing projects, said the workforce measure provides a local funding commitment that can leverage outside grants and tax credits.

Opponents and some residents expressed frustration with two similar measures on the same ballot and asked for clearer summaries for voters. One resident urged the council to ensure the public can readily compare the proposals on the ballot; council members responded by outlining the next steps for ballot materials and argument deadlines.

Council members stressed that the council was only authorizing placement of the measures, not endorsing either proposal. “This item is for us to authorize these measures going on the ballot, and we're not approving either measure. That's for the voters to decide,” said Council member (name not specified in the transcript); the city clerk confirmed that each measure’s proponents will have priority to submit the ballot argument and that deadlines for arguments and rebuttals are in mid to late August. The agenda report noted argument deadlines of Aug. 14 and rebuttals due Aug. 21.

Several speakers also raised concerns about the real estate industry's role in the competing proposal. “Their unjust measure will reduce available funding for affordable housing to a trickle, and it should be soundly rejected on moral grounds,” said James Lapp, a local pastor. Lane Johnson, who helped organize the workforce measure, told council members the opposing campaign’s stated goal was to “block and defeat our measure,” adding that the community should not be confused about intent.

After public comment and brief council remarks thanking organizers and advocates on both sides, the council voted to place both measures on the ballot. The clerk will forward the measures to the county elections office for final processing and to determine ballot order by lot, as is standard practice when competing measures qualify for the same ballot.

Votes at a glance

- Item 1 (Consent): San Lorenzo River live lehi burrowing rodent mitigation project — Approved on the consent calendar (roll call: all ayes).

- Item 2: Authorize placement of two competing housing measures on the ballot — Approved (roll call: all ayes). The measures will be forwarded to the county clerk; ballot order will be decided by a coin toss.

What happens next

City staff and measure proponents will prepare the official ballot summaries and arguments; authors of the measures have priority to submit the primary arguments. The city clerk identified mid-August deadlines for arguments and rebuttals. The council emphasized that any policy or appropriation resulting from either measure would require future implementation steps and, if a measure passes, additional administrative work to allocate funds and meet statutory requirements.

Context

Speakers at the meeting repeatedly framed housing as a public-health and workforce issue, citing teachers, first responders and health-clinic staff who struggle to find local housing. Supporters described the workforce measure as a means to generate predictable local funding that can be combined with state or federal subsidies and tax credits. Several speakers noted recent local history of ballot measures and campaign controversy and urged clarity for voters.