Lea este articulo en español aqui.
BenitoLink, as part of its commitment to serve the San Benito County community, is identifying false or misleading claims and providing context to statements made in local political fliers ahead of and during this year’s elections. Flyers that show no clear author, that BenitoLink receives complaints on or present blatantly questionable facts are eligible for a Fact Check review.
The Hollister Guardians, a self-described grassroots organization associated with the Campaign to Protect San Benito—formerly known as Preserve Our Rural Community (PORC)—has mailed thousands of fliers to both city and county residents criticizing Hollister Mayor Mia Casey and several Hollister City Council members.
Like the flier previously fact-checked by BenitoLink, the current one is a mix of false and out-of-context information. It adds new accusations and restates some charges that BenitoLink refuted in a previous Fact-Check article and coverage of City Council meetings.
As noted in the preface to this series, there is nothing to stop anyone from using the U.S. Postal Service to stretch the truth to make a political point. Making false claims in political advertisements is legal because political ads are protected under the First Amendment.
Further, when accusations are made against a public figure such as an elected official, as is the case with this flier, the Supreme Court has held that such individuals seeking relief from libel charges have a greater burden of proof than regular citizens. The court ruled that public figures can sue only if it can be proven that an accusation is made with “actual malice” and with “the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
BenitoLink encourages public dialogue to foster an engaged community and is dedicated to providing news that helps residents make informed decisions on key local issues. This is particularly important during election season.
Here BenitoLink looks into the flier’s claims to find the factual record and offers an informed conclusion.
The claim: “Award Homes promised to build low-income housing; Their partner, Eden Housing, asked the city for a $25 million discount on fees; $25 Million Easter Gift to Fairview Developers.”
The record: The 100-unit multifamily affordable apartment project was approved by a unanimous vote of the Hollister Planning Commission on April 2, 2023, as part of the West Fairview Subdivision. The subdivision also includes 646 houses from Award Homes which received approval by the previous city council on May 17, 2021. Award Homes donated the land for the Eden Housing affordable project and also built the surrounding infrastructure.
Eden Housing requested a density bonus, as allowed under city and state law, to be applied to the project at the Planning Commission’s Jan. 25, 2024, meeting. The project qualified because it was 100% affordable housing and comprised at least 15% of the total number of units in the subdivision.
According to a study of density bonuses published by Meyers Nave Legal Services, “A developer who meets the law’s requirements for affordable or senior units is entitled to the density bonus and other assistance as of right, regardless of the locality’s desires (subject to limited health and safety exceptions).”
The Housing Accountability Act stops the city from denying a housing project unless it fails to comply with general plan or local zoning ordinance standards. According to Hollister’s Planning Commission, the Eden Housing project was “consistent with the certified Environmental Impact Report and West Fairview Specific Plan.”
At the time, Mayor Ignacio Velasquez and councilmember Rolan Resendiz both voted for the Awards Home project.
BenitoLink reporter John Chadwell wrote: “After 21 years of back-and-forth negotiations and multiple lawsuits, Award Homes and the city juggled the numbers of market-rate versus affordable homes and apartments, and even though Velazquez said he has never cared for the project, all four council members voted in just under three minutes and without further comment to pass the ordinance.”
Conclusion: The “Easter Gift” claim is false and lacks context. Award Homes followed through on their promise to plan part of their subdivision for low-income housing and donated land and infrastructure. Eden Housing asked for and received a density bonus as was their right under the terms of the Density Bonus Law and the Housing Accountability Act. The bonus is not a “gift” but rather a legal requirement.
The claim: Award Homes “should use some of their profits to subsidize the low-income apartments; Award will make a big profit and should have subsidized affordable housing.”
The record: As proffered during the Jan. 25 Planning Commission meeting, Award Homes invested in the project by donating the land to Eden Housing and building the surrounding infrastructure.
Conclusion: The claim ignores a contribution to the project made by Award Homes, which helped to subsidize affordable housing. While Award Homes could further contribute to the Eden Housing project, there is no legal obligation to do so, and the city has no right to demand it.
The claim: The Density Bonus equals a “$25 million tax on Hollister Residents” that is “essential to maintain roads, sidewalks, fire, police.”
The record: The $25 million is not a lump-sum discount to the developers, but an extended discount to the buyers. This is facilitated by a 55-year, $150,000-per-year reduction in Community Facilities District fees (CFD), from $1,900 per unit per year to $400. (The 55-year total is $8.25 million, with a 3% inflation factor built in, which comes to roughly $25 million.) In comparison, Eden Housing Project homeowners will still be paying $40,000 per year toward CFD fees for the next 55 years.
The fees are assessed in certain districts, called Mello-Roos Districts, to help pay for essential services. They are collected as part of property tax bills and are a means of keeping affordable housing truly affordable. While they contribute to services in the district, the main source of funding for fire and police and other services is covered in the city’s budget.
CFDs vary from district to district. Award Homes agreed to annex into both the CFD 4 and CFD 5 districts, making their $1,900 per unit yearly fees the highest in the city.
Conclusion: The claim is misleading. The amount of the Density Bonus comes as a discount on property taxes over a 55-year period.
The claim: “Affordable housing not for locals? They did not mention that many families who qualify may come from a wider region.”
” data-medium-file=”https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?fit=300%2C224&ssl=1″ data-large-file=”https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?fit=780%2C583&ssl=1″ src=”https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan.jpg?resize=780%2C583&ssl=1″ alt=”” class=”wp-image-102512″ srcset=”https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C766&ssl=1 1024w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=300%2C224&ssl=1 300w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C575&ssl=1 768w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=1536%2C1149&ssl=1 1536w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=2048%2C1532&ssl=1 2048w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=600%2C450&ssl=1 600w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=400%2C299&ssl=1 400w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=200%2C150&ssl=1 200w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=1200%2C898&ssl=1 1200w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=1568%2C1173&ssl=1 1568w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=2000%2C1496&ssl=1 2000w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?resize=706%2C528&ssl=1 706w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-scaled.jpg?w=2340&ssl=1 2340w, https://i0.wp.com/benitolink.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/scan-1024×766.jpg?w=370&ssl=1 370w” sizes=”(max-width: 780px) 100vw, 780px”>
The record: As explained by Hollister Associate Planner Eva Kelly at the April 2 City Council meeting in response to a question by Councilmember Roland Resendiz, subsidized affordable housing, being a state program, cannot legally be restricted to residents of Hollister only. However, Councilmembers Tim Burns and Rick Perez then suggested creating a local preference ordinance to cover affordable housing vacancies. At the April 15 meeting, the council directed the city attorney to create such an ordinance, which is pending.
Conclusion: The accusation is based on the false premise that the city can legally restrict affordable housing to local residents. Further, the city is drafting an ordinance that would allow Hollister residents preferential access to the housing.
The claim: “Hollister’s Mayor & City Council spent $2.5 million to double the sewer’s capacity to give sewer service to housing developments outside of city limits.”
The record: The $2.5 million was spent to replace two of four critical membranes at the Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant that had aged out. This was not done to expand its capacity. During his presentation to the council on Aug. 7, 2023, Director Of Community Services William Via said the plant had been built in 2008 with a capacity of 4.7 million gallons a day (MGD) and the maximum flow of the plant is limited by the state of California to 4.0 MGD. The current flow is 2.6 MGD, so expansion to provide services is totally unnecessary. (The other two membranes were replaced in 2016.)
BenitoLink covered the details of the replacement in an article about the meeting. The claim was also rebutted in a previous BenitoLink Fact Check concerning an earlier Hollister Guardians flier.
Conclusion: This repeated charge is untrue. The replacement of membranes is normal maintenance of a worn-out part, in the same way that someone would replace a filter in a home water purification system. The sewage treatment plant is currently operating at below capacity, even taking into account the agreement to process San Juan Bautista’s waste, and there are no immediate plans for expansion.
The claim: “Mayor & Council keep adding more houses.”
The record: In California, housing is governed by two forces: Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers and the Housing Accountability Act. The RHNA is part of a state mandate that requires cities to create a long-term general plan for development and to identify “adequate sites” to accommodate the next eight years of growth. The number of units to be built in Hollister is set by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments and implemented by the San Benito County Council of Governments. In the 2015-2023 cycle, the number of units was set at 1,316. For the 2023-2031 cycle, Hollister needs to be able to prove it can accommodate 4,163 more units to meet the state’s requirements.
Several cities have gone to court in costly battles to challenge their RHNA mandates, such as Irvine, Huntington Beach and Coronado. There have also been private lawsuits filed against cities that do not comply with RHNAs, such as those filed by Californians for Homeownership against Fullerton. La Mirada, Laguna Hills, South Pasadena and others.
Beyond that, as mentioned above, the Housing Accountability Act forbids cities from denying housing projects that are consistent with its general plan.
Conclusion: The claim is misleading and lacks context. As the state opens the door for more housing, the mayor and the City Council have very little leeway in controlling growth mandated by the RHNA, as has been demonstrated by a number of unsuccessful lawsuits by other cities.
The claim: “Councilwoman Morales and Mayor Casey threatened legal action against the Guardians because our newsletters inform the public about their give-aways to developers; Morales went further to try to block Guardian member Bella Rosales from being appointed to the planning commission.”
The record: Councilwoman Dolores Morales asked the city attorney if there was any way the city could respond to the disinformation, as documented in this article and in a previous Fact Check by BenitoLink. At the March 18 City Council meeting, Morales expanded on the theme and asked if Hollister Guardian member Bella Rosales could be blocked from becoming a planning commissioner. The city attorney said that she could not, but could be removed if there was any evidence of illegal activity on her part. Following her appointment to the Hollister Planning Commission, Rosales attended one meeting, on March 28, before resigning effective April 25.
Rosales has acted as a paid canvasser for Campaign to Protect San Benito, a group introducing a county-wide land use initiative, according to a campaign finance report from 2022.
Ecologistics, a 501(c)(3) organization based in Los Osos, acts as a fiscal sponsor for the Hollister Guardians and other organizations. When contacted for a previous fact check on the Guardians, Ecologistics CEO Stacey Hunt told BenitoLink that groups they work with are forbidden to promote a particular political party or to campaign for or endorse candidates, which would be a violation of 501(c)(3) restrictions, and that Hollister Guardians “has been cautioned to do neither of those things, either openly or surreptitiously.”
Conclusion: The claims lack context. Morales asked if Rosales could be blocked from becoming a commissioner because the Guardian fliers misinform, not inform, the public. Ecologistics cautioned the Guardians from straying into political endorsements, raised in part by their promotion of Resendiz.
We need your help. Support local, nonprofit news! BenitoLink is a nonprofit news website that reports on San Benito County. Our team is committed to this community and providing essential, accurate information to our fellow residents. It is expensive to produce local news and community support is what keeps the news flowing. Please consider supporting BenitoLink, San Benito County’s public service, nonprofit news.
