|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In an election season marked by a lot of national discord, the Mountain View City Council race has gone in the opposite direction, with candidates sticking to policy positions while also showing support for each other.
This year, the slate is crowded with nine contenders looking to fill four seats on the City Council. But despite a high level of competition, the candidates have stayed above the fray, as seen at a public forum on Oct. 9, co-sponsored by the Mountain View Voice and League of Women Voters.
On Wednesday evening, candidates gamely fielded questions about housing, downtown revitalization and Measure G, among many other important issues. With the clock ticking, they all proposed ideas to make Mountain View a better place, coming up with both big and small fixes that could bring about a real difference in the city.
Housing goals
Housing has always been a hot-button topic in Mountain View, and forum questions elicited a range of responses from the candidates who had different perspectives about how the city could best meet its housing needs
For many, the city is falling short of its goals to plan for more than 11,000 units by 2031. “I don’t think we’re going to make it,” said former Mountain View City Council member John McAlister.
The candidates described a challenging economic environment, as high interest rates have pushed up construction costs. Several expressed concern about what was happening in North Bayshore, with Google pulling back on some of its office and affordable housing commitments.
“We’re at the mercy of developers,” said former Mountain View Whisman school trustee José Gutiérrez.
Still, the candidates had ideas for Mountain View to get back on track. The city could ramp up housing density in areas zoned for multi-family homes in the R3 district, said Human Relations Commissioner IdaRose Sylvester.
Mountain View also could streamline its permit process to get homes built faster, said Nicholas Hargis, a congressional aide for U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo.
Advocating for more money at the state and federal level is also an important step, said Mountain View Whisman school trustee Devon Conley – a position that many others supported as well.
Still, some candidates offered a more optimistic outlook. Unit counts are not the only part of Mountain View’s housing element that matters, according to Mountain View City Council member Emily Ann Ramos. The plan also removes many barriers to building housing, she said.
Similarly, Mountain View Mayor Pat Showalter says the city’s framework for housing growth is good, and that the zoning is robust and allows for more housing than is needed.
“It doesn’t all have to be developed by any stretch of the imagination,” she said.
Downtown vacancies
The issue of downtown vacancies also featured prominently in the forum, with candidates ticking off ideas for how to boost businesses and attract more people to the area.
Human Relations Commissioner Erik Poicon came out in favor of a commercial vacancy tax and supported more permitted uses in the downtown area. Other candidates proposed more flexible uses of retail spaces, particularly on the ground floor of buildings to bring in more foot traffic. Hargis pushed hard for more storefront window advertising.
Looking further afield, former Mountain View City Council member Chris Clark said the city should do more to attract businesses that have been hit hard by the gross receipts tax in San Francisco. Mountain View also could serve as a larger hub for economic activity, as it is at the center of multiple transit networks, he said.
Showalter described the importance of the city’s existing economic vitality plan to help turn things around with 164 actionable items that can be implemented, she said.
Taking it a step further, Conley proposed that the economic vitality plan be presented to the City Council more frequently, every six months, with updates and metrics for the public to see what is going on.
McAlister also encouraged the city to “think outside the box” and do more in the downtown area to attract people. It could turn parking garages into pickleball courts or even do something as basic as installing a public restroom, he said.
Climate change, good governance and campaign finance reform
At the end of the evening, candidates discussed topics of their own choosing. Climate change rose to the top of the list as an important issue, with Hargis, Showalter and Poicon describing the need for stronger mitigation strategies, like electrification, regional coordination and carbon sequestration.
Gutierrez honed in on the relationship between the city and Mountain View Whisman School District, drawing attention to the conflict over the Shoreline funding agreement. It’s an issue of good governance, he said, adding that elected officials and staff should work together to ensure the best outcomes for the community.
Ramos spoke to the importance of campaign finance reform, noting that Mountain View had a good track record with voluntary expenditure limits and a disclosure act. It keeps races transparent, she said.
While the forum featured a lot of stump speeches, it also put the candidate’s relationships and personal interactions on display. As the clock wound down, several contenders embraced each other, expressing a sense of relief at being closer to the finish line.
“As you’ve seen tonight, we have a really great group of candidates this year. Democracy is very healthy in Mountain View, thank goodness. And the good news is that you can vote for almost half of us,” Clark said.
To learn more about the candidates’ positions and other local races, readers can go to the Voice’s election coverage guide. The League of Women Voters is also posting a recording of the forum on its website.
Keep supporting the Voice by clicking on those candidate advertisements! 🙂