There’s Nowhere to Live Here.
Addressing Mendocino County’s Housing Crisis
A Report by SEIU 1021 Mendocino County Chapters
Introduction
“If I work here, I should be able to afford to live here,” has become an all-too-common refrain from public employees in Mendocino County.
SEIU Local 1021, a union of 60,000 members in Northern California, represents about 1,100 public employees in Mendocino County--workers at the County, the superior court, Mendocino College, and the City of Ft. Bragg. A concern that dominates many union meetings and discussions has been the lack of affordable housing here in the county. As we heard more and more stories of employers struggling to attract qualified candidates, even well-paid professionals, because of the lack of housing, Local 1021 established a working group to investigate the issue and determine what we could do to address this problem.
Mendocino County, like much of the state of California, is experiencing a crisis of housing availability and affordability. The lack of housing is driving up house prices and rents. It is impacting employers who are unable to recruit employees because of the historically low vacancy rates and slow pace of new construction. This is also making it harder for young people who have grown up here to find a place of their own. The reasons for the housing crunch are varied and complex: a construction worker shortage; burdensome and expensive permitting and development fees; housing being converted to short term vacation rentals; water and sewer hookup limitations; housing stock loss due to wildfires; limited sites available for development because of zoning, fire danger, coastal restrictions, etc.
The Mendocino County Grand Jury issued a report in July 2021, pointing out “the critical lack of affordable and available housing” and is calling on the County to work with municipalities, special districts, and tribal governments to help spur housing development.
Mendocino County’s population is relatively stable, and growth is projected to be modest over the next five years, so meeting the county’s housing needs should be an achievable goal. The shortage is not just in the affordable housing segment, but with workforce and middle-income housing as well.
Municipalities and the county government have taken steps to address the housing shortage with some success: creating housing land trusts, getting state and federal funds to develop affordable housing, and expanding and streamlining the process for developing accessory dwelling units. But more action is needed.
There are many local organizations that have been working on this issue. They have helped raise awareness about the problem and have made progress in crafting solutions to address it. As part of our efforts to better understand the roots and extent of the problem, we have reached out to and met with these local organizations. We have reviewed stacks of reports and analyses, including the County’s Housing Element. In addition, we surveyed our membership about their personal experiences and aspirations concerning housing.
In our inquiries we heard many stories of new employees living for months in motels or campgrounds while they searched unsuccessfully for a home to rent or buy. We heard shocking stories of full-time employees who have struggled with homelessness despite what are considered to be “good” jobs. It is an issue that impacts not just low-income individuals, but well-compensated professionals as well.
We know that this is a multi-faceted and complex issue that local and state governments have been grappling with for some time. We understand that there are no quick fixes or overnight solutions. But it has become clear to us that it is an issue that we must engage in as a union to represent our members.
Every community must have a skilled, healthy, and adequately housed workforce to have a sustainable economy. If a community lacks any of these elements, then the workforce looks to other locations to satisfy their career and housing needs. Employers follow the same logic. For instance, if they cannot find adequate housing for their workforce, employers will consider alternative locations where affordable housing is more available.
This report seeks to bring housing data into tight focus, highlighting the immense economic burden posed on low- and middle-income households by the housing crisis. Based on our findings, we argue for the implementation of a diverse array of policies and programs that have already been identified and proposed to increase housing affordability for the county’s working families. The challenge is to marshal the resources and the support to carry this range of proposals through. The County owes this to both its residents and its employees.
We have sought to pull together a number of the most promising ideas that have been brought forward by individuals and organizations working to address housing affordability and availability here in Mendocino County; we commit to supporting these efforts.
Background
Mendocino County is lightly populated and primarily agricultural and rural in nature. Its estimated 2021 population is 86,801. This has remained relatively static and is not projected to increase much in the coming years. Population growth for Mendocino County is projected to be a modest 1.2 percent annually, providing the opportunity to get a handle on the housing shortage. The median household income in Mendocino County in 2021 is $54,399. This is $28,166 lower than the State median. The county has 35,264 households. (Data pulled from HealthyMendocino.org)
Historically, timber, agriculture, and tourism have been the primary employers in the county. Increasingly, however, the county has become a destination for people looking to move away from urban areas such as the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sacramento metro area.
The county’s striking scenic beauty is contrasted by its high level of poverty and economic hardship. Fourteen percent of families in the county live below the federal poverty line. Forty-seven percent of residents are eligible for Medi-Cal. Mendocino County also has a large percentage of residences and small communities in areas at high risk for fire.
The county has very distinct areas that face very different challenges and opportunities. It is characterized by its rugged topography, small communities, and tourist destinations. The coast has a strong tourist economy; inland is marked by vineyards and range land. The availability of land, water, and infrastructure is limited. Much of the county’s terrain is hilly and forested and designated as high fire danger areas. Different areas of the county face very different circumstances and challenges when it comes to housing development. The coastal areas contend with the pressure of short-term vacation rentals to support the tourist economy in addition to the development restrictions covering the coastal zone. In inland Mendocino, much of the area that would be easiest to develop is prime agricultural land, while the hills have proved to be particularly vulnerable to annual wildfires. Round Valley struggles with limited economic and employment opportunities and the influx of illegal cannabis activity.
Mendocino County is required by state law to develop a plan, called the Housing Element, to address housing needs in the county as part of its general plan. “The Housing Element is designed to facilitate the development of housing adequate to meet the needs of all County residents. The Element includes an analysis of both the constraints that may impact housing development as well as the resources available to facilitate it.” (p. 1)
The County and the four incorporated municipalities have developed detailed and comprehensive Housing Elements as part of their general plans to address identified housing needs, but the housing shortage persists, despite focused attention for many years.
“The Mendocino Council of Government’s (MCOG) Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), part of the overall 2018 Regional Housing Needs Plan, assigned the County a production goal of 1,349 housing units for the unincorporated area between 2018 and 2027.” (Housing Element, p. 9) The RHNA also identified a need for 239 units for Ukiah, 111 for Willits, 137 for Fort Bragg, and nine for Point Arena.
But Mendocino County and many other parts of the state are suffering from a severe lack of housing. What is causing the shortage of available and affordable housing in Mendocino County? What are the primary roadblocks and barriers keeping Mendocino from meeting its housing development goals?
The County’s Housing Element suggests a number of factors:
“Rental unit supply has historically been limited in the inland valleys due to a lack of land suitable for multifamily development. In the coastal areas, the use of residential structures as vacation rentals has lowered the overall supply of potentially rentable units, and coastal development restrictions prevent additional density increases that could alleviate the situation.” (p. 63)
“Many factors can constrain residential development—market constraints, such as development costs and interest rates, and governmental constraints, which include land use controls, fees, processing times, and development standards. Environmental and infrastructure issues also impede residential development.” (p. 67)
“Development costs include both the price of land as well as the cost of construction. A number of factors affect the price of land, such as parcel size, necessary improvements, and supply. Land prices vary greatly throughout the County. In general, residential-zoned lots are much more expensive along the coast than in inland areas, and the price of land is typically higher in the central and south than in the far north. The availability of infrastructure is another major factor affecting the price of land in the County. Lots with water and sewer service are usually more expensive.” (p. 67)
Survey of SEIU 1021 Members
We surveyed our membership employed with Mendocino County, Mendocino Superior Court, Mendocino-Lake Community College, and the City of Ft. Bragg. The average residence in Mendocino County was 19.8 years (median 17 years). People taking the survey have worked in Mendocino County for a significant length of time (average 13.7 years, median nine years). Of those surveyed, 45.6 percent rent and 38 percent own their home. Twelve percent of respondents reported living outside of Mendocino County because it is too expensive, or they were simply unable to find housing.
Survey respondents identified home ownership as a top goal but expressed doubt of whether that dream could be realized. Even individuals who reported incomes well above the county median stated that homeownership seemed to be out of reach. There were a number of common threads in the surveys, both highlighting the problem and suggesting some possible solutions.
Stretched Thin and Living on the Edge
Something that came up again and again was the precarious nature of the housing situation for respondents. Something we found particularly troubling in the survey was the high percentage of income that respondents reported paying toward housing costs. Twenty-three percent are paying between 40 and 50 percent of their income on housing, and 32 percent report paying 50 percent or more.
That is not sustainable or healthy for our local economy, especially considering that these are jobs that pay fairly well.
A shocking finding in the survey was the high number of respondents, many with stable full-time employment, who find themselves living on the edge and unable to find stable living arrangements.
Of the survey respondents, 22 percent have experienced homelessness, with three percent currently homeless while working.
It took respondents between six months (average) and two years (median) to find permanent housing (rental and owner occupied).
Housing availability and affordability were by far the most pressing concerns by respondents.
Twenty percent report sharing a home with unrelated individuals to share costs. One respondent reported living in 10 temporary places in less than year.
Here are a few of the responses:
“I’ve been homeless for almost 2 years now. As a County employee, I make too much for housing assistance, and I don’t make enough to rent through real estate agents or private landlords.”
“I still hear that new hires are living in hotels.”
“I have four young adults living in my home who all lost their housing due to either mold or eviction, and they cannot find affordable housing.”
“I would like to be able to afford a place where I don't have to depend on family or friends to share a place in order to afford to live close to work. Currently, living on my own would require more than 50% of my monthly take-home salary.”
“My kids and I were homeless when we were kicked out of our house in Mendocino County, so their dad let us move in with him in Lake County.”
“I camped for a while at Willits KOA.”
“I couch surfed for about a year.”
“When I first got a job at the county, I had to rent a room at the Discovery Inn for $1600 a month for months.”
“I stayed at my daughter’s place for a few weeks.”
“I have been looking for housing that is affordable for single people with pets! It’s impossible to have my own place unless I get a roommate or get a second job.”
“I had to stay at the shelter in Fort Bragg for a short time while I was working.”
“I lived in an RV in Lake County.”
“After my divorce, I did not have a place to live. I lived with friends couch surfing.”
“Twice I’ve been homeless and working because of housing availability.”
“I camped outdoors.”
“I’ve been staying with relatives since 2016. We finally bought a travel trailer and are staying in that on a relative’s property until we can purchase a home.”
“We need more affordable homeownership opportunities, and assistance with first time homebuyers better advertised - I work in housing and still don’t know where to go.”
Unable to Establish Roots
Another theme that emerged in the survey responses was distress and anxiety about being unable to establish roots here in the community.
Many respondents expressed feeling unsettled, never sure how long their current arrangement would hold up. They are often in temporary situations, living with family or roommates, unable to achieve the independence that they thought permanent employment would provide.
“If my career prospects don’t improve, I may have to leave the county.”
“The cost to rent or buy seems to far exceed the average wage here. I would like to see a plan to serve the population who live and work here, rather than outside investors.”
“We need affordable housing for young families.”
“I am renting with family because I can’t find a place to live by myself. I’ve been looking for three years.”
“I’ve been staying with my parents while looking for an affordable apartment or house for my dog and myself.”
“There needs to be more affordable housing for low-income people. It’s obscene for the most affordable apartments to be $1200 a month. Do the math. How much of that rent is covered by a minimum-wage job or a disability check? None.”
Priced Out of the County
A common refrain from respondents was that the price of homes and rent in Mendocino County was too high, forcing them to live outside the county or in substandard or crowded situations.
“I live in Lake County because I can’t afford Mendocino County.”
“I wish county residents could purchase a home. Seems like a lot are being bought by people from the Bay Area and other metro areas.”
“I would like to see a plan to serve the population who live and work here, rather than outside investors.”
“I would like to see more median-income housing for both rental and purchase.”
“The average apartment rents for about $1200 to $1300 per month. The rental agency requires your income to be three times the rent. I make around $35 per hour, and I can’t even afford that. How is someone who makes minimum wage or is a single parent supposed to find a place to live?”
“I’m in my twenties, I work full time, and I can’t find an apartment/rental/home that I can afford by myself. I know that I’m not the only person in Mendocino County in this situation.”
“I’d like to see the County of Mendocino provide a housing stipend for employees similar to the County of Sonoma.”
Homeownership:
A Dream That Is Slipping Away
A goal expressed by many respondents was homeownership, but most felt like it was a prospect that was slipping away from middle-income residents of Mendocino County.
Many found themselves earning too much to qualify for affordable housing programs but not earning enough to be able to purchase any of the small number of houses coming on the market.
“We are finally in a position to buy but have been unable to find any rentals for five years (must allow dogs). Now that we are looking to buy, there is nothing affordable in Mendocino County that will qualify for an FHA loan.”
“I would like to rent a house and eventually be a homeowner, but it just seems like it will never happen.”
“I would like for people working for the county to be able to afford housing in the community in which they work.”
Housing Shortage Is Impacting Recruitment
“Our new supervisor had a hard time finding housing, and her start date was pushed back because of the lack of housing in Mendocino County.”
“We need to create housing so that the County can hire more people. Right now, if the County hires someone [from outside Mendocino County], they have no place to live, even temporarily, unless they know someone. This makes the pool of new employees smaller and creates more of a hardship to accept employment with the county.”
Eighteen percent of respondents reporting applying for federal, state, and local programs to help with housing costs.
Restrictive Rules Limit Options
A number of respondents pointed out some of the restrictive zoning requirements limited or prohibited creative solutions to the lack of housing, including mobile tiny homes.
“Lift restrictions that don't allow family members to sleep in trailers on private property. My disabled son has slept in a trailer on my property for 15 years so that I can care for him. Now the county is demanding that he move out. Where is he to go? Many more people would have a place to be if this restriction was lifted.”
Housing Is Being Converted to Short-Term Vacation Rentals
A problem identified on the coast is short-term vacation home rentals. As a major tourist destination, there has been a trend of single-family homes being converted to short-term vacation rentals. Outside investors have bought up properties and rent them through Airbnb and other such services, taking much-needed housing stock off the market for permanent residents.
The City of Fort Bragg and the Town of Mendocino have passed laws limiting or blocking this, but in the unincorporated parts of the coast, these short-term rentals have proliferated. The County did pass a temporary moratorium in 2017 with the intent to make it permanent, but this has not occurred.
Another problem that respondents identified was the proliferation of vacant properties that have been purchased as investments by outside interests that then sit on them.
“I’d like to see a moratorium on vacation home rentals. Enforce county regulations on existing vacation home rentals.”
“No more short-term rentals and out-of-area owners. Tourists belong in hotels, not in houses.”
“It seems that many family units in Mendocino County have been converted to vacation rentals, and therefore are not available to the public to rent. Demand far exceeds supply, especially on the coast.”
Housing Shortage Leads to Discrimination
When the housing market is tight and rents are high, the potential for discrimination and abuse rises.
Twenty-two percent of respondents reported discrimination in seeking to rent or buy a home. This ranged from reports of feeling slighted or ignored for being young to being told outright that the owner would not rent to individuals of a certain race.
Because of the tight market, those who did not have substantial savings were often brushed off by landlords and real estate agents. Finding a place to rent if you have pets can be particularly difficult.
Respondents also reported difficulties in getting basic repairs done at their rentals. When there are few options, many feel trapped.
“I literally had someone say no because I am Black.”
“My youthful appearance and lack of rental history imposed a requirement to have a co-signer.”
“Our current apartments accept pets, but she won’t allow us to get a small dog, but she allows other tenants who are Caucasian to have pit bulls and other big dog breeds.”
“I believe I was turned down from renting a house because I have kids and they might make mess.”
“Because I’m Hispanic, they assume I can’t afford rent.”
“My boyfriend and I were shunned from rentals for having tattoos.”
“Discrimination: landlord doesn’t fix anything and is always complaining.”
“Rental manager tends to only accept applications from Caucasians and tends to give in to them more.”
“Real estate agent told us we would never be able to afford a house here on our wages, to look elsewhere.”
“I don’t believe I was taken seriously when I met with a broker, in terms of purchasing a house. I haven’t been able to find a rental that I can afford that allows pets, so I was looking into buying.”
“When I met with a broker, she didn’t take me seriously at all, because I was a single person and my income wasn’t enough for really anything.”
“I had a [housing] voucher and was discriminated against with it.”
“Poor upkeep, disrepair and off-code renovations.”
More Support Is Needed for Middle-Income People
“[We need] more programs to assist mid-level income earners. We need to increase the supply of permanent housing.”
“Every new housing [development] being put up is for low-income. Where does that leave us who work? I need senior housing, but everything I look at, I make too much money for. We need senior housing for all kinds of people, not just the disabled, poor, or homeless. Take care of the people holding up the economy.”
“Make too much for assistance, make too little to be on my own.”
“I’ve spoken to a lot of people in a similar situation as me, and we all agree that availability AND affordability are major factors when it comes to why we haven’t found housing yet.”
A common sentiment expressed in the surveys was that while there seemed to be adequate resources directed at housing for low-income individuals, there seemed to be a lack of support and a lack of housing for middle-income residents.
“Most housing that is being built is for low-income families. We who don’t fall into low-income but also don’t make enough to pay $2k in rent get forgotten about, and we start to struggle. There should be more affordable housing for the ‘middle class’ that is affordable, spacious, and not tiny old apartments.”
“[We need] more affordable housing that isn’t only for low-income individuals. Like townhomes that are affordable for the working class. Anywhere from $1,000-$1,500 rent or in that range so that families aren’t forced to live with multiple roommates.”
“How about focus on the working poor? The county worker who lives paycheck to paycheck and is too ‘rich’ for assistance but too poor to save up $40 grand for a down payment and who can’t buy a two-bedroom house for $325,000. Why are we always the forgotten population? We have low-income housing everywhere, but because we work, we get no help.”
“I think the county and city municipalities need to work with code enforcement and get abandoned/neglected properties and clean them up and help people rebuild homes.”
Needs Identified
Survey respondents proposed a number of needs for alleviating the housing crisis in Mendocino County:
“Infill. The ADUs [accessory dwelling units] that Fort Bragg has allowed and provided plans for is a good start. More housing with a granny unit built into it. Free or low-cost permits for those wanting to convert for accessibility, to allow more seniors to stay in homes safely. Many vacant homes in my community are falling into disrepair. Seek grant funding for the regional municipality to purchase from owners of the vacant homes and turn into HUD housing.”
“The multi-acre homestead is a worldview, not a planning strategy. We need smaller lots and more housing for couples and small families.”
“More efficient use of urban areas in Ukiah and more mixed-use housing and commercial.”
“More subsidized housing for full time workers and lower cost of rentals by private realtors.”
“Smart affordable home development; development of tiny housing options.”
“More affordable housing. More ability to get loans to buy at reasonable prices. More help and incentive for fire safety measures being taken by homeowners, landlords, etc..., more housing where animals are accepted. There’s basically nowhere that allows people to rent with dogs, and that’s outrageous.”
Why There’s No Easy Solution
Finding and retaining qualified employees is by far the biggest challenge for small businesses in Mendocino County. Unfortunately, there is no simple solution to this problem--there are many underlying obstacles, ranging from education and workforce development to infrastructure limitations.
But what we have been hearing as the biggest deterrent to recruiting qualified candidates is the high housing costs and lack of available housing in the county.
You don’t have to look very far to find stories of individuals and employers in Mendocino County struggling with finding housing.
“I can think of a half a dozen employees that the county has offered jobs to here on the coast, but they had to turn down the offer because they couldn’t find anywhere to live,” said a county employee in Fort Bragg.
As one member who responded to the union survey put it, “Someone who works for the county should be able to afford to live in the county.”
Ukiah School District Superintendent Debra Kubin has sent emails to school staff asking for any leads on housing for teachers the district is trying to hire. Adventist Hospital has expressed concerns about the housing shortage and reportedly maintains a supply of apartments to accommodate new hires and temporary employees.
“Ross Liberty in the past year and a half has hired 23 workers for his … Ukiah factory known for crafting motorsports vehicle exhaust systems, but he’s concerned that the supply of housing locally will make it difficult to compete for top talent and for best pricing on his products…’The number of homes available in Ukiah Valley is nil,’ said Dick Selzer, owner and broker of Selzer Realty & Associates, a residential and commercial real estate firm with multiple offices in the county. ‘It’s very common to have multiple offers on one property and for the sale price to go over the list price.’” (North Bay Business Journal, Employers in Mendocino County say housing shortage limits growth, 4/12/21, Jeff Quackenbush).
“Jessica Fraidenberg fell in love with the Mendocino coast when she came here last year with her chef husband and two children from Washington state, hoping for a less crowded place to escape the pandemic. The landing was less smooth. ‘Our little family of four was homeless and camping on the beach for just over a month. Over the last eleven months we have applied for rentals, talked to every person we encounter and begged…yes, begged for a real place to call home. It’s devastating knowing that even with all my efforts we are still technically homeless. And not because of a lack of income or some other ridiculous restrictions. Just simply, there isn’t enough housing for the amount of people.’
“Renee Kaucnik, human resources manager at Redwood Coast Medical Services (RCMS) on the south coast, said they actively place ads to help workers find housing. 'Last year, we lost two employees, one bilingual, which we cannot afford to lose, due to not finding housing and one being displaced because the owners of the rental they were in decided to move to the area themselves in order to leave the city during the pandemic,' Kaucnik said in an interview by email. She said the growing stock of vacation homes is a major obstacle for workers.
“'There are multiple homes used for vacation rentals. The owners may not realize the impact on this community of having so many vacation rentals versus long-term rentals available, but if they’ve spent any time here at all, they must know of RCMS and realize it takes people to run this operation. Other business owners in our area have the same issue. Another obstacle is the unrealistic cost of a rental, unless we are talking about an ocean-front, nicely appointed home. The amounts charged for rentals here is usually out of reach for 50 to 60 of my 75 employees,' she wrote.”
“In 2019, the short-term rental taskforce was deferred to 2020/2021 by the [Mendocino County] Board of Supervisors, as part of a work-plan for the department, given competing priorities and a limited staff. Given the past direction received from the Board of Supervisors, staff reiterates that it remains a priority issue that requires comprehensive input.” (Housing Element, p.12)
This is an issue that impacts working class and middle class housing stock both for rental and homeownership.
A standard way to look at housing and housing affordability is to determine the percentage of income that a household must commit to afford a median-priced home. While Mendocino County housing is slightly more affordable for first-time buyers than houses in the state overall and certainly than in the San Francisco Bay Area, local housing still requires a greater proportion of residents’ income than the national average, according to Dick Selzer, owner and broker of Selzer Realty & Associates, a residential and commercial real estate firm with multiple offices in the county.
The affordability index for first-time homebuyers in California at the end of last year was 43 percent, meaning that percentage of residents could pay for a median-priced home without spending over 30 percent of their income on housing, according to the California Association of Realtors. The index for Mendocino County was 44 percent for a $446,250 median-priced single-family home, compared with 47 percent in Sonoma County ($612,000) and 39 percent for the Bay Area as a whole ($924,330). For the nation, 69 percent could afford the median price of $268,520. (NBBJ)
The state and the county have taken some steps to try to address the housing shortage, such as allowing and encouraging the development of accessory dwelling units as infill and to encourage higher density on land zoned as residential.
The current challenges may reflect some of the increased demand brought on by people relocating from more expensive areas because of the ability to work remotely. This was accelerated by COVID-19 pandemic, which forced many employers to require employees to work from home.
The Ukiah Valley has seen twice as much subsidized housing developed as market rate housing, but both segments are falling significantly below the need projected by the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
According to the Mendocino County Housing Element:
“According to the 2011-2015 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) database, 38.2 percent of households were overpaying for housing (more than 30 percent of total income), and 21.5 percent were severely overpaying for housing (more than 50 percent of total income).” (p. 53)
“According to the Rural Community Housing Development Corporation, it costs roughly $250 to $280 per square foot to construct both single-family and multifamily housing in Mendocino County. To construct a multifamily housing complex with 40 units would cost roughly $200,000 per unit.” (p. 67)
“For the foreseeable future, lending practices will require a sizeable down payment. In order to address this constraint, Mendocino County Community Development Corporation offers a Down Payment Assistance Program to help lower-income families afford to purchase a home. Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCCs) are another way of helping low- and moderate-income households afford their first home by lowering the tax they pay, which enables them to afford a larger payment.” (p. 68)
“The County’s zoning ordinances define the type of development and the development standards for specific residential uses on property throughout the County. Title 20 of the County Zoning Ordinance, Division I, sets development standards for the inland area. Divisions II and III apply to the Coastal Zone and the Town of Mendocino, respectively.” (p. 68)
“The building permit process for single-family and multi-family units in both the inland area and the Coastal Zone typically takes between two weeks and a month from the receipt of the application to the issuance of the building permit, unless a CDP is required, which typically extends the timeline by 6-8 months, depending on project complexity.” (p. 88)
“The Coastal Commission has historically noted that the water/sewer system limitations are the primary factor limiting residential density in the Coastal Zone…Sewer service in the unincorporated Ukiah Valley is provided by the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. This district serves the largest number of County residents living outside the cities. As of September 5, 2019, the connection fee for a one-bedroom unit was $11,016, with an additional $1,224 for each additional bedroom in the housing unit. A three-bedroom unit was $13,464. Fees are consistent regardless of unit type, and no discounts are available…The water and sewer connection fee in Brooktrails was $23,711 as of August 2019.” (p. 91)
“The cost of developing a well can run as high as $30,000. Design and installation of a septic system can run $15,000 to $40,000.” (p. 93)
“PBS fees on total development costs range from two percent to 5.7 percent depending on the type of development.” (p. 95)
“The conversion of housing to vacation home rentals (also referred to as short-term rentals) supports the tourist-based economy—which tends to generate jobs, though usually at lower wage levels—reducing inventory and driving up home values and average rents. Most vacation rentals result from investment or retirement purchases, often by persons living outside the area. Typically, larger older units, often with three or more bedrooms, are those converted. Noise and traffic impacts and the presence of vacant units for part of the year also negatively affect the well-being of the community.” (p. 97)
“On August 1, 2017, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors passed and adopted Ordinance No. 4391, approving interim restrictions on the establishment of new short-term/vacation home rentals on residential property, pending the study and consideration of land use and existing regulations pertaining to such activity. This urgency ordinance was passed in response to concerns that a substantial and increasing share of the County’s housing stock was being utilized for the purpose of short-term/vacation home rentals, thereby reducing the share of units available for long-term lease by permanent residents or job-seekers. Ordinance No. 4391, however, expired 45 days later because it was unable to sustain the votes necessary for a required extension. On September 12, 2017, the Board of Supervisors further directed the Department of Planning and Building to develop a draft policy update for review and discussion by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Since that time, the County continues to conduct research regarding these issues and will monitor the impacts of short-term rentals on long term housing options. This was deferred to 2020/2021 as part of a work-plan for the Department.” (p. 98)
Moratoriums or caps on development: “The County has not enacted any growth management ordinances or moratoriums on growth. However, some water and sewer districts have enacted or been placed under temporary moratoriums on new connections due to problems with inadequate infrastructure or water availability (see “Environmental, Infrastructure, and Public Service Constraints,” below)…Housing developers have expressed concern that the County’s inclusionary housing ordinance makes new development projects unprofitable. The Vineyard Crossing development in north Ukiah is stalled in part because of these requirements.” (p. 99)
“The density bonus provisions for the inland area have not stimulated the development of affordable housing. The only developer that used this tool in recent years was Ukiah Land LLC’s Garden’s Gate approved subdivision (application S 3-2005) in 2010. No construction has occurred to date.” (p. 104)
Recommendations
The Housing Action Team (HAT) and the Anderson Valley Utility Service District submitted a comprehensive list of recommendations that is included in Appendix B of the county’s Housing Element that we cannot improve upon. It provides a road map to addressing the multifaceted challenges that have led to our current housing shortage and the steps we need to take to emerge from it.
The County Grand Jury has recommended that the county, municipalities, tribal governments, and special districts collaborate and coordinate their housing development activities. We fully support the Grand Jury’s proposals.
As we have looked into this issue, one thing has become very clear. Public employers cannot sit by and hope that the free market will address the severe housing shortage here in Mendocino County. Government needs to engage to remove barriers and foster new development. The various levels of government need to partner to identify opportunities, developable land and areas close to water and sewer hook-ups to meet the demand.
The crisis in housing here in Mendocino County and throughout the state has started to gain a higher level of attention. Viable solutions and strategies have been put forward by groups like HAT. The County and local municipalities have created detailed plans in their Housing Elements. There are funding opportunities that are being considered at the federal and state level, that the county should be able to take advantage of.
Now is the time for the county and local municipalities to take decisive action to begin to get a better handle on this vexing issue. Based on our review of the data, our members’ report experience and the proposals put forward by local groups working on these issues, we make the following specific recommendations:
