HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.4.a - John Stonebraker - comment re_ 3.4.a housing element progress reportFrom:John S.
To:Clerk of the Board
Subject:comment re: 3.4.a housing element progress report
Date:Tuesday, March 24, 2026 8:20:43 AM
.ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening
attachments, clicking on links, or replying..
I would like to have item 3.4.a pulled from consent and considered as
part of item 4.11. These housing element progress reports are required
by HUD and should normally be routine items suitable for the Consent
Agenda. This year, alas, the fraught implementation of the County's
million-plus-dollar transition to Accela software meant that the report
presented to the Planning Commission last month was woefully incomplete.
Due to the diligence of one unpaid hillbilly, county staff hurried to
fill in the blanks for this version presented to you.
Which too is very incorrect and unfit to be submitted to the state. For
example, it includes the Orchard View Apartments at 1425 HWY 99 within
city limits, which units should be credited towards Gridley's Regional
Housing Needs Allocation rather than the County's. Additionally, while
in previous years, the AHEPR correctly distinguished whether old units
being replaced were Demolished or Destroyed, this report incorrectly
shows Destroyed for units that were actually Demolished. And also
incorrectly leaves the column blank for many REPL units, making them
appear as new units being created. Considering the County's RHNA
includes a rebuild allocation of 1966 units within this eight-year
cycle, it is important to get these details right.
I can explain in more detail if given time at the podium. I regret that
mortal frailty has prevented me from leaving in time to be there at 9:00
sharp.
John Stonebraker
Magalia, CA