Letter: Support Measure Q
September 01, 2024
Measure Q is a 1% sales tax that has been sponsored by the Davis City Council for the November ballot and is expected to provide approximately $11,000,000 annually for general government use. The council cannot commit to using the funds for any specific purpose. However, the council has shared that these funds could be directed to infrastructure, emergency response, climate resilience, addressing homelessness and affordable housing among other things.
Interfaith Housing Justice Davis (IHJD) is an alliance of faith groups in Davis that supports the full spectrum of housing, including providing shelter to the unhoused, affordable rental housing for low and moderate incomes and offering for-purchase opportunities for 1st time home buyers. We envision a Housing Trust fund (HTF) that can help our city address these housing imperatives.
IHJD understands that passing Measure Q will not solve the affordable housing crisis in Davis but is the first step to developing a funding stream for the Housing Trust Fund. IHJD and the greater Davis community must then press our council to fund the HTF in an ongoing and significant fashion. If well-funded, our HTF could be the vehicle by which we provide programs that assist our fellow Davisites to stay housed, provide down payment assistance programs to get young families into Davis and to provide the gap funding needed by nonprofit affordable housing builders to build more affordable units.
Please join IHJD in supporting Measure Q and use your voice to advocate for funding the HTF.
Without a concrete commitment from the city council, there is no guarantee that funds for any housing assistance will follow with the passing of measure Q. Eleven million dollars is a lot of money to ‘possibly’ or NOT be used for any of the suggested needs. At this time, with this lack of specific commitments, I would not vote for Q.
Posted by: Patricia Gaumer | September 01, 2024 at 05:28 PM
It is time for the City Council to ask UCD to do it's share in funding the housing trust fund. There is no doubt that UCD has impacted housing demand in Davis, they should contribute directly to affordable housing in the Davis community.
Posted by: Colin Walsh | September 02, 2024 at 01:19 AM
Below is a comment I tried to submit yesterday, but mistakenly did not do so:
It's pretty clear that the council would use these funds to create even more Affordable housing subsidies, rather than pay down unfunded liabilities.
I'd also like to see an analysis regarding the fiscal impacts of adding Affordable housing - above that which already exists. In other words, would this make the situation with unfunded liabilities even "worse"? A sales tax increase, which would actually end-up further burdening the city, financially?
I'd also like to see an analysis regarding the percentage of Affordable housing that Davis already provides, compared to other cities.
Truth be told, I'm increasingly viewing "interfaith" organizations as "attractants" for homeless populations.
People are ultimately no different than cats. If you feed and/or house them, you'll find plenty of takers - not necessarily limited to "local" cats or people. (And no, that's not intended as an insult to either of these mammals.)
I've often wondered why relatively expensive cities enact policies in which the very poor can live there - essentially for free. Rather than having the "market" tell them to move-along, like it does for most other functioning adults.
But wouldn't Affordable housing funds go farther, if housing for those with limited incomes was provided in areas of the region, state, or country where it's cheaper in the first place? Davis itself isn't particularly expensive in comparison to California as a whole, so my question is more applicable to places like San Francisco, Santa Monica, etc.
But if you want to keep existing renters in place, there are few tools more powerful than rent control. I personally know individuals who have benefited greatly from it, and would have otherwise been priced out of their community a long, long time ago. And yet, this solution is summarily ignored in Davis, at least.
The other issue (regarding this potential sales tax increase) is that it's really not going to go very far, in regard to providing subsidized housing. (Again, a function of trying to build in a place where your dollar doesn't go that far.)
Posted by: Ron O | September 02, 2024 at 06:22 PM
The article says:
"However, the council has shared that these funds could be directed to infrastructure, emergency response, climate resilience"
The funds could also go to raises and funding the pension and healthcare shortfalls (this is my guess where pretty much all the funds will go).
I'm wondering if Ron has heard the "interfaith bible" quote that says "if you give a man a fish, make sure you do it in East Davis so he will camp in that part of town not be hanging out aeound youe house in El Macero or North Davis farms waiting for you to come back with more fish"...
Posted by: South of Davis | September 03, 2024 at 06:53 AM
There are no safeguards on how any of the tax money from Measure Q will be spent. I always vote NO on these types of taxes.
Posted by: Keith | September 03, 2024 at 10:39 AM
"The funds could also go to raises "
We've already been down that road with a previous sales tax measure.
https://davisvanguard.org/2010/01/vanguard-study-finds-that-previous-sales-tax-measure-went-largely-to-pay-for-fire-and-other-employee-salary-and-benefit-increases/
Posted by: Keith | September 03, 2024 at 10:57 AM