The recent approval of the Dana Reserve by the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors is a milestone for our community, addressing crucial housing needs designated as a Tier 1 Priority by the county. It is the largest, most affordable housing project ever approved, includes tens of millions of dollars of currently needed infrastructure, and will save individual Nipomo Community Service District (CSD) ratepayers an average of $750 per year (according to the developer) as opposed to if the project was not approved.
That is a win for all of us.
However, we must express our concern regarding the 3-2 vote margin rather than a unanimous 5-0 decision, and the chilling effect such a close vote might have on future affordable housing development.
Particularly concerning, however, are the factual inaccuracies spread by one supervisor, who vehemently opposed the project.
While explaining his opposition to the project, 4th District Supervisor Jimmy Paulding repeated several erroneous statements. At best, it appeared Supervisor Paulding was incapable of understanding simple facts about the project. At worst, Supervisor Paulding, whether deliberate or not, participated in a consistent campaign of misinformation and disinformation.
Some of Supervisor Paulding’s more significant and troubling incorrect statements include the following:
• Supervisor Paulding stated the Dana Reserve would incur a negative cost to the county. He stated this despite contrary analysis provided by county staff and third-party experts, which estimated a positive financial impact. He shared his own guesses at numbers and then stated, “That is the way the math adds up to me,” as if his off-the-cuff calculations should be taken over more formal professional analysis.
• Supervisor Paulding made claims of insufficient water availability for the project, which were contradicted by analysis from the Nipomo CSD and third-party studies, and which not only affirm adequate water resources but also project savings for existing ratepayers within the Nipomo CSD.
• Supervisor Paulding asserted concerns about fire risk on the project. He did this despite expert analysis thoroughly reviewed by county fire officials contradicting such a belief. This underscores the importance of relying on expert evaluations and sticking to the facts. There was no need to spread such false fear. It was unproductive and pure fearmongering.
• Supervisor Paulding affirmed an alternative development for the same land crafted by a group dedicated to changing the housing project’s plans, while casting doubt on the credibility of projections from the developer’s experts. He appeared to arrive at these conclusions without investigation of the matter prior to his vote and against significant third-party and county-led analysis displaying otherwise.
• Supervisor Paulding expressed concerns over fiscal impacts to the Lucia Mar Unified School District (LMUSD). In reality, the Dana Reserve was the first development in county history to ever pay more than the state legally requires since the state set a standard in 1996. This was confirmed in a written statement from Lucia Mar’s superintendent in which he also stated that the project fully funds all necessary upgrades needed. Additionally, the Dana Reserve also includes 84 deed-restricted affordable housing units for teachers and LMUSD staff—something Supervisor Paulding voted against building.
Many of Supervisor Paulding’s contentions are in direct contradiction of the conclusions reached by the SLO County Planning Commission, including his own appointed commissioner, and county staff who have dedicated some years to analyzing this development. Given the paramount importance of addressing housing needs as a Tier 1 Priority, it is imperative for our elected leaders to acquaint themselves thoroughly with the facts of housing proposals. Decisions of this magnitude must not be swayed by erroneous assumptions.
Supervisor Paulding’s inability or unwillingness to understand the basic facts of the project led him to vote against the housing project—one that includes a $3.2 million in down-payment assistance program, donates about $10 million in land, completes tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure currently needed in Nipomo, and that would lead to a savings for each individual Nipomo CSD ratepayer.
That is unacceptable.
The reality is that Supervisor Paulding’s comments sounded more like an anti-growth NIMBY trying to hide behind “legitimate” concerns.
Our 194 members, made up of a bipartisan and diverse coalition of community members, refuse to believe this is how our elected officials should act. This must not be the case. This cannot be the case.
As an elected leader in our community and within his position of authority, Supervisor Paulding perpetuated a series of mistruths. These mistruths stoked the flames of division and unnecessarily drove a community further apart.
Our belief is that leaders must unite, not divide.
Therefore, we call upon our elected representatives to prioritize factual accuracy and informed decision-making in all matters, but particularly those related to housing. If we do not do this, we will only continue to see our communities’ in-fighting. Δ
Generation Build is a 70-plus member pro-housing group in SLO County. Respond with your own opinion for publication by submitting it to letters@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Summer Guide 2024.
The simple and unfortunate answer is that Paulding is terrified of recall and wants to secure his space against any potential future challengers for his seat in the chambers. He is not governing in the best interest of the County, but rather his motives are self-serving.
This essay is nothing but a cowardly and fictitious hit piece aimed solely at Supervisor Paulding.
The DR project, and the 3 Supervisors who voted for it, boldly claimed that this is the best housing project ever seen by SLO County.
Upon closer examination, we can now see that mirage and vision offered up by the RRM imagineers , and team NKT, really is bringing 1400 market force houses (90% of the project) most of them to be priced from $800k to $1.2M , and should provide handsome returns for the developers and investor. For the affordable requirement to qualify for SB330 fast-tracking and minimal permitting requirement incentive for builders the bare minumum 100 deed-restricted affordable apartments (10% of the project) are not anything more than a remote possibility when PSHH could possibly find funding and a builder to make that portion of the project viable. It may never happen.
In fact, the many marketed amenities for DR, including the Long overdue Sherriff substation, the long-promised Cuesta College South County Campus, the 3 childcare facilities, the CalFire station are merely land donations and there is no commitment, assistance, or promise to build any one of these structures.
So, the fact that supervisor Peshong didn’t have one single question, and Supervisors Arnold and Ortiz Legg offered up one or two questions about the complex staff report or the Developers commitments speaks volumes about who demonstrated objectivity , diligence, and integrity .
Supervisor Paulding intentionally and ethically declines campaign contributions from developers to instill his neutrality when it comes time to sit in judgment. Can the other supervisors, the same ones who raised their own campaign limits five-fold in direct contrast to overwhelming public feedback and state guidelines- say the same?
It is shameful that NKT and their marketing team have declared their primary reason for building DR as to alleviate the gut-wrenching challenges of those left out of the housing market, and to use the motto “housing for all “ and to offer a housing ladder when in fact this is 90% about return on investment and capitalism.
Supervisor Paulding continues to adeptly serve all his constituents, not just those that vote for him, or those that donate money to him.
Shame on you anonymous cowardly author at Generation Build.
Dear Planning Commissioner Bruce Berlin,
We are (now) 200+ SLO County residents with a public (not anonymous) board. We live in the realm of facts, can be firm in our beliefs, but demand respectful behavior from our members. We kindly ask that you please grant us the same respect.
Your comments further echo the NIMBYism we detailed in our letter. Numerous of your statements are simply untrue. Like with Supervisor Paulding’s speech, we feel obligated to correct such misstatements.
Examples include, but are not limited to:
MISSTATEMENT: the Dana Reserve is “bringing 1400 market force houses”. FACT: The Dana Reserve includes 1,227 market rate housing units, of which, they were predicted by a third party to be the most affordable of any development in the County (market rate is not a dirty word). In fact, across the entire project at least 639 housing units are designated as very-low, low, moderate, or workforce income housing. More are missing-middle.
MISSTATEMENT: “most of the units are priced from $800k to $1.2m”. FACT: Third party studies predicted for sale units would be priced from $475k to $1.2m (above a million is all we know?), with the majority of units (i.e. more than half) being less than $725k. Perhaps your estimate will be correct, however, if you and Supervisor Paulding continue to vote against housing projects and suppress supply.
MISSTATEMENT: “for the affordable requirements to qualify for SB330 fast-tracking and minimal permitting requirement incentive…” FACT: There are no affordability requirements for SB330. Perhaps you thought the Dana Reserve was processed under SB35? We do discuss affordability laws at our meetings if you are interested in learning.
MISSTATEMENT: “for the bare minimum 100 deed-restricted affordable apartments”. FACT: The Dana Reserve includes 156 very low- and low-income deed-restricted affordable housing units. To provide some context: The county had only approved 7 very low-income units since 2020 prior to the Dana Reserve’s approval.
MISSTATEMENT: The deed restricted affordable units “are not anything more than a remote possibility when PSHH could possibly find funding and builder to make that portion of the project viable. It may never happen.” FACT: With over 2,000 units under management, PSHH is the most qualified developer of affordable housing units in the County (HASLO too!). Furthermore, PSHH operates as its own builder. Lastly, the land will be deed-restricted for affordable housing only. Nothing else can be built there. We are not sure what point you are trying to make here.
MISSTATEMENT: “There is no commitment, assistance, or promise to build any of these structures”. FACT: There is assistance: the Dana Reserve is donating improved and entitled land, waiving fee credits for donations, and paying higher than required fees in many cases.
MISSTATEMENT: “The fact that supervisor Peshong didn’t have one single question, and Supervisors Arnold and Ortiz Legg offered up one or two questions….speaks volumes about who demonstrated objectivity, diligence, and integrity.” FACT: Supervisors Peschong, Arnold, and Legg are community oriented, good people with high-integrity. Your political disagreement with public officials does not require personal attacks.
MISSTATEMENT: “Supervisor Paulding intentionally and ethically declines campaign contributions from developers to instill his neutrality when it comes time to sit in judgement.” FACT: Supervisor Paulding did not provide neutrality when it came time to sit in judgement. In fact, Supervisor Paulding read a pre-written 5,000 word speech against the project, written before the Public hearing and County or developer presentations (i.e. when he “sits in judgement”), to proclaim his opposition. Unfortunately, many of the statements in this pre-written speech were debunked immediately prior to his speech.
We will stop there but will restate that we are not anonymous. Feel free to check out our board on our website.
We wish you the best, hope you learn the facts on projects moving forward, and support housing in the future.
Let’s build.
I mean…Jimmy must have thought Bruce would have a better comment than that when he asked him for back up, right?!
What kind of people want to develop on nature reserve land? To take up hundreds of acres by building a little over 1200 homes is poor land management. We need to build up, not out. Enough single family homes, we need tall buildings. Not cheaply made boxes that developers can make to turn a quick profit. It’s not rocket science.