Marin County is still struggling with its response to a court order to remove wording from its housing element that allows the countywide plan to trump community plans.
During a three-hour meeting on Monday, the Planning Commission labored to come up with wording that would satisfy Marin Superior Court Judge Sheila Lichtblau and the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development.
Rather than fully endorse any option presented to them, the commission chose to create its own version by blending the planning staff’s recommended language with wording suggested by Strawberry resident Bruce Corcoran, who sued over the issue.
Lichtblau ruled in March that the court must remove “precedence clauses” it inserted into the countywide plan in an effort to satisfy the state that the housing element was “affirmatively furthering” fair housing.
In September, the Planning Commission rejected a recommendation from staff to insert new wording into the housing element to accomplish the same objective that the precedence clauses were designed to achieve. The commission instead sent a recommendation to county supervisors that they stick to the court’s order and simply remove the precedence clauses.
However, county supervisors couldn’t decide which path to take when they took up the issue on Oct. 29. They chose to seek an extension of the judge’s Nov. 12 deadline to remove the precedence clauses to allow more time for Corcoran and the county’s planning staff to hammer out a compromise.
Corcoran agreed to extend the deadline for complying with the court order to remove the precedence clauses from Nov. 12 to March 12.
On Monday, staff presented planning commissioners with four options: insert the new wording that commissioners rejected in September; remove the precedence clauses; add revised wording recommended by staff; or make changes negotiated between Corcoran and county counsel.
At the beginning of the meeting, Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency, stated that planning staff would be unable to support the changes that had been negotiated with Corcoran. She identified three problem areas after consulting with the state.
“These are the three areas that we as staff particularly identified as not being in alignment with the efforts towards affirmatively affirming fair housing,” Jones said.
Corcoran objected to staff consulting with the state prior to presenting to the Planning Commission as it did before the commission’s September meeting.
“Allowing HCD to inject itself into the county’s planning decisions on a step-by-step basis is bad governance and diminishes the authority of your commission,” Corcoran said.
Staff objected to Corcoran’s suggestion that it replace the use of the term “race equity” with “underserved communities.” Jones said the term jibes with the county’s race equity plan. Racial equity differs from racial equality since it assumes that certain races deserve extra help due to past inequities.
“I have objected to ‘race equity’ on principle because I believe it is racist,” Corcoran wrote in a letter to the commission.
“I think most people in Marin County would agree that if the county is going to spend money, you want to do it for the most underserved people regardless of race,” Corcoran said.
Planning staff said it also could not omit a statement that the county would review “the use of the terms ‘single-family’ residential use, ‘protecting the character of the neighborhood’ and other land use mechanisms that may deter fair housing choice.”
Staff also disagreed with Corcoran’s desire to remove the statement: “Staff found that the community plans contained exclusionary language for the development of multi-unit projects and included discriminatory language such as ‘protecting community character.'”
“At this point, the planning staff’s claim that they ‘found’ exclusionary and discriminatory language in the community plans is unsubstantiated, arbitrary and capricious,” Corcoran wrote in a letter to the commission.
Planning Commissioner Margaret Curran said, “I don’t like the notion of community character being villainized as being a culprit here, something that is inconsistent with other goals. I find great discomfort with the notion that protecting community character is by definition somehow discriminatory.”
Curran said she saw the commission’s task as retaining as much of the community plans’ authority while also affirmatively furthering fair housing.
Commissioner Margot Biehle said, “Marin County has a long history, perhaps not encoded now, but a long history of discriminating on the basis of race. To the extent that we can continue to rectify that, I think that’s an important thing to do.”
Jones said if there is time, she will allow the commission to review the final language before submitting it to county supervisors for their approval.
