Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for May 11, 2024

Fairfax Council recall effort is waste of time

Our Fairfax Town Council is a hardworking, honest, excellent group of people that we are fortunate to have caretaking our town. It is disturbing to see a renegade group spring up to try and recall Town Council members Lisel Blash and Stephanie Hellman (“Fairfax councilmembers targeted by recall effort,” April 26).

I worked with Blash on the Victory Village senior affordable housing plan. Blash was excellent, smart and caring. She made it happen. Some people fought it. I think they were mainly community members who bought their homes long ago and had no idea about today’s housing market.

I think this is true again for the recall effort. People secure in their homes seem to be the ones fighting it. If Fairfax wanted Lynette Shaw’s vision we would have elected her to Town Council in 2022. I voted for Hellman.

It’s unfair to say the council isn’t being careful with the locations for new development in the state-mandated housing element. Nobody wants more ridge-top housing. I think that’s clear by the council’s support for the plan to buy the Wall Property and keep it as open space.

Being a Realtor here in Fairfax for 26 years, I watch news about housing carefully. I would like friends I lived with here in the 1970s to come back. Young people should not be priced out. Yes, I want high-rises next to the bus stops.

The Marin Voice commentary by Warren J. Wells published May 2 with the headline “Without more affordable housing, traffic will only get worse” said it well. Why should someone working at the local Good Earth market have to drive from Vallejo?

— Spirit Lynn Wiseman, Fairfax

Raise gas tax, enforce existing laws to fix traffic

In his recently published Marin Voice commentary, Warren J. Wells asserts that Marin’s population is outstripping housing units (“Without more affordable housing, traffic will only get worse,” May, 2). He argues that Marin’s population “gained roughly” 10,000 new residents between 2010 and 2022, while only adding “fewer than 3,000” units.

Putting aside housing, I think he is mainly expressing a concern with pollution and traffic. A more effective way to fight those issues would be to raise the gas tax and enforce our laws requiring a valid driver’s license, car registration and insurance.

Estimates of drivers on the roads without one or more of those items range around 20%, according to data from the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Insurance Information Institute.

— Niccolo Caldararo, Fairfax

Larkspur needs stronger rent-control ordinance

In a small city like Larkspur, stable housing is essential for maintaining our close-knit community. When rents are driven up faster than tenants can pay them, working families get pushed out of their homes and are forced to move far away. Their children are forced to leave local schools and their dollars to stop funding local businesses.

This kind of displacement hollows out our town. Larkspur becomes restricted as a place where only the most affluent can afford to live, with no support by or integration of the workers who actually keep the town running. Schoolteachers, health care workers and safety professionals are priced out of their homes and forced to move long distances away, in many cases taking much needed skills with them.

By capping annual increases at 60% of inflation or 3% (whichever is lower), the rent-control initiative put forward by the Keep Larkspur Fair and Affordable campaign would create a secure environment in which working families feel comfortable putting down roots. Without the constant threat of unaffordable price hikes hanging over their heads, renters can continue to invest their time and money into the community with confidence, keeping Larkspur vibrant.

Meaningful rent control can also deter outside corporate landlords from making speculative investments that squeeze profits from unprotected tenants. Tenants help to maintain Larkspur’s small-town character, ensuring that our existing stock of affordable housing remains under local ownership. By giving local tenants the protections they deserve, the rent control measure proposed by Keep Larkspur Fair and Affordable aims to keep our city stable for every family, homeowners and renters alike.

— Dorothy O’Leary, Larkspur

Rent-control ordinance in San Anselmo is too strong

I am writing in regard to Katherin Smith’s recently published letter asserting that rent control is the right choice for San Anselmo.

Smith expresses concern that “any increase of rent beyond 5% could push many of our longtime San Anselmo seniors, families and community members out of their homes.” It should be noted that a 5% increase will only happen if it is less than 60% of the annual consumer price index. Additionally, the new ordinance states that a property owner cannot charge a tenant for utilities in addition to rent. This all seems unfair to the landlord.

Over the last 20 or so years, the CPI has averaged just under 3%. Sixty percent of 3% is 1.8%. Thus, a landlord over the past 20 years would average only a 1.8% increase each year. But property taxes can increase by as much as 2% a year. I don’t think the math works out for property owners.

The San Anselmo ordinance is one of the most arduous of any in California. Some rent control may be needed, but the San Anselmo ordinance is over the top. I don’t think the council used common sense in enacting it.

— Dean J. Moser, Novato

Conservation should not be MMWD’s prime focus

When Marin elected three new members to the Marin Municipal Water District Board of Directors, I thought we finally had a group who understood that conserving water, while important, was not the only issue. As one 2022 IJ headline stated, “Election kickstarts MMWD’s drive to increase water supply.”

But the new board is proving no more responsive than its predecessors. One recent article (“Marin Municipal Water District develops conservation playbook,” May 5) shows that the board is prepared, once again, to put conservation ahead of every other concern. After raising rates by more than 50% for some customers while lavishly spending to improve Marin’s watershed for wildlife, MMWD now wants to convince ratepayers to use water as though we live in a constant state of drought.

That’s the focus even though much of this year’s rainfall was spilled into the ocean because our reservoirs couldn’t hold all the water nature provided. The board may scold us about wasting water, but the inaction of the current and former boards has resulted in wasting far more than I think proposed conservation measures can ever save.

MMWD seems loathe to invest money to deepen reservoirs, let alone to recycle or desalinate. If we lived where nature didn’t provide rainwater, or where water wasn’t otherwise available, we would willingly devise further means of limiting usage. But we live with a very different ecohydrology; If the current board refuses to grasp the implications of that fact, voters must keep trying to find those who will.

— Steve Stein, Greenbrae

Trump’s behavior is bad for the US economy

In a recent article by the Associated Press, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen expressed concern about economic stagnation in our country if Donald Trump is elected president in November (“Yellen says threats to democracy risk US economic growth, an indirect jab at Trump,” May 4).

Yellen rarely steps into the political arena. However, she implied that if Trump regains the White House, his disregard for America’s domestic processes and its institutions could set the U.S. back for decades.

Based on this alone, we the people must vote to reelect President Joe Biden, no matter our political affiliation.

— Joel Schwartz, San Rafael