September 27, 2016

Austin City Council Candidate Questionnaire

Friends of Austin Neighborhoods (FAN) is a coalition of neighborhood associations and at-large individual members improving neighborhoods and improving neighborhood representation. We appreciated the opportunity to hear candidates’ thoughts on City Council policies can positively impact the quality of life for residents in our neighborhoods. The following questions are based on our principles of neighborhood inclusion, but we welcomed the candidates to include in their answers any disagreements they have with the premises. Candidates Gonzalo Camacho and Rob Walker chose not to participate.

  1. What policies will you advocate to accommodate and welcome the full abundance and diversity of people who aspire to live in Austin’s high-demand neighborhoods?

    Casey Ramos (District 2): Although I am sympathetic to those who would like to move into our great neighborhoods, I would focus first and foremost on original residents. They have literally built this great city with decades of property taxes. These residents along with the next generations of families deserve to move back into the neighborhoods where they grew up.

    Wesley Faulkner (District 2): I’m for diversity and density of housing all around Austin. This should help in reducing costs. If there is a need we should also help with rental credit vouchers to assist with affordability.

    Delia Garza (District 2): The City’s current housing plan shares these goals and provides tools to help us ensure we’re opening our City in a way that welcomes everyone to every part of the City. We still have a long way to go to achieve that vision, and it’s a value that both the current and previous Council have been advocating for.Increasing available affordable housing has been one of my top priorities and areas of focus as a Council Member. I co-sponsored a resolution to look into recommendations to strengthen affordable housing requirements in homestead preservation districts. This is a tool that can be used for low-income homeowners faced with high property taxes. I also supported a resolution brought forward by the Council Housing Committee that looked into initiatives to address anti-displacement and economic inclusion, Austin Fair Housing Initiatives.

    Planned Unit Developments allow for the creation of not only affordable rental units but also can include a certain percentage of homeownership opportunities through permanent affordable housing in these developments. If we use these strategically, we can significantly increase the affordable housing available for our community. We should also find effective ways to promote affordable housing in accessory dwelling units (aka granny flats or ADUs) and small units, which are largely located in high opportunity areas that have good walkability and access to public transit.

    Aside from affordable housing that utilizes public subsidies, increasing the availability of low and mid-priced homes across the City is another thing we must work toward if we want to encourage diversity across the City. I was proud to sponsor a resolution earlier this year that begins the process of exploring options of creating more permanent affordable housing in diverse parts of town, and I plan to follow through formalizing policy based on the resulting recommendations to make more home ownership opportunities a reality for our working families.

    Additionally, The CodeNEXT process will provide opportunities to change our Code in a way that promotes building of more diverse types of housing to meet the needs of different populations, and address the gap of “missing -middle” housing we’re currently experiencing. Through all options available to us, I will continue to work to ensure we have diversity and equity across the community.

    Louis C. Herrin, III (District 4): I have a problem with this question because it has many different possibilities. If you are looking at the Mueller Project in which the developer is putting in affordable housing where there are restrictions on the homeowners on how much they can sell their properties for in the future — I am against it. It may be nice, by doing this, the taxes are kept low, because the house is being appraised for below market value. Under this scenario, there is no incentive for the homeowner to improve or upkeep the property when they know that they are not going to be able to sell the house for a nice profit which would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. The City needs to continue to build affordable homes, apartments, and condominiums to accommodate the growing number of people moving to Austin. These dwellings need to be scattered throughout Austin. One policy I would advocate is for the dwelling owners to keep the dwellings well maintained and in a livable condition.

    Gregorio “Greg” Casar (District 4): Austin is severely lacking in its access to abundant, affordable, and integrated housing. We are also, unfortunately, on the list of most segregated cities in the United States. We need to use all the tools at our disposal to increase our diversity, across the city. Significant increases to amount of investment in affordable housing is necessary in the current climate to purchase land, subsidize units, and renovate units especially for lower income levels in higher-demand neighborhoods. However, to slow displacement and promote inclusion, we also need to add sufficient housing capacity to accommodate many more of the people who want to live in Austin. I also believe that a variety of housing sizes and types can help integrate our city. Since we spend so much civic effort and taxpayer money on building and preserving affordable multi-family, we should do our best not to incentivize its conversion into higher-dollar units.

    James “Jimmy” Flannigan (District 6): I want to lead on the CodeNext effort to ensure that housing can be built all over Austin, not just into segregated and distant parts of the city like District 6. That, in conjunction with streamlined and more effective permitting and code enforcement departments, can create more affordable and abundant housing both through new construction and keeping older housing safe and up to code.

    Don Zimmerman (District 6): In my observation, Austin’s centralized planning philosophy – that is, the idea that city bureaucrats and lobbyists should create and interpret ordinances for deciding how property owners and purchasers use their property, is the root of the policy problem. Houston, with a lack of such centralized planning and zoning, has a better mix of high and low income housing integrated within the city, reacting to market forces instead of political policy. I favor a policy approach that focuses on optimizing existing infrastructure capacity, while allowing more market flexibility. For example, constraints on the market’s building density demand are imposed by lack of water/wastewater capacity and right of way limitations. I acknowledge there are few votes on Council to change the current system, which IMHO is doomed to greater failure.

    Leslie Pool (District 7): Council with my support is attacking the affordability challenge by creating Neighborhood Preservation Districts, Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and linkage fees. Out of the Cactus Rose case, we created a process for Tenant Relocation and funded it in the FY17 budget because it’s not right to summarily displace tenants without notice or recourse. Last year, I was one of three sponsors for BASTA – the Tenant Assistance Program – that provides legal support and a voice to tenants with negligent landlords.

    We’re working on Permanent Supportive Housing to address that growing need, and wrapped the need for that housing into our Homeless Veterans Housing initiative. We will take on homelessness among youth next; that’s the second phase of the HUD initiative that Secretary Castro was in town last month to meet about. Austin hit “functional zero” success in housing our homeless veterans. Youth are the next cohort in the federal program; I am also very concerned about the number of older women who don’t have a place to call home.

    Natalie Gauldin (District 7): I believe it will take diversity in housing types to welcome diversity in neighbors. Many don’t realize this, but our current land development code does not allow many affordable housing types (tiny houses, duplexes, row homes, etc). We can absolutely welcome new neighbors and preserve the wonderful character of many Austin neighborhoods.

    Sheri Gallo (District 10): Austin is the 11th largest city in the nation and the fastest growing. We must figure out how to add housing units in our city to meet the demands of our increasing population…and do it in a way that does not have a negative impact on the character of existing neighborhoods and encourages a diversity of residents. It is important for us to produce a variety of house types and sizes which includes tiny houses on small lots, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and large homes on the typical SF lots.

    Nicholas Virden (District 10): Relaxed zoning and land-use regulation codes, especially if they are provided within the CodeNEXT project. The more types and classes of housing we can build in more places, the better we can accommodate all of our citizens. Create enough supply of housing, apartments, condos, and so forth, and you’ll create an affordable Austin for all.

    Alison Alter (District 10): I advocate imposing linkage fees to provide the resources necessary for the dispersal of affordable housing throughout the community. I also support investments in education and job training that create opportunities for economic mobility. I also want to improve our multi-modal system to reduce the cost of transportation.

  1. How will you resolve policy issues and cases that come before you when the wishes of some incumbent residents in a neighborhood conflict with the interests of other residents and the larger, city-wide community?

    Casey Ramos (District 2): I would do my best to accommodate the lower income neighborhoods first.

    Wesley Faulkner (District 2): Some policy issues are ideological and some are practical. Tradition for tradition’s sake has it’s place, but should not outweigh the validity of a viable solution. Everyone’s voice should be heard but I will make my decision based on the merit of the item.

    Delia Garza (District 2): It is always important to hear both sides and the different perspectives the community has before coming to any final decisions. I have always advocated for all voices to have a seat at the table in order to find common ground whenever possible. It is important that throughout these meetings, City staff is available to facilitate and help answer questions, and that Council Members maintain an open door policy to welcome and gather perspectives from all sides leading up to Council votes. Rather than taking hard stances across the board, I truly try to consider every matter in front of Council on a case-by-case basis and balance the needs of the City such as the need for more affordable housing and density along core transit corridors with the needs of neighborhoods.

    Louis C. Herrin, III (District 4): First, I would look at the policy to determine why the policy was written in the first place. I would need to see if the policy is still appropriate or needs to be updated. Then I would look at the change or variance to the policy versus the good of the city or neighborhood. This is how I would weigh my decision. I will most likely lean towards the health and safety of the neighborhood.

    Gregorio “Greg” Casar (District 4): I believe that I am a progressive first, and an elected official second. We regularly face disputes from many parties in our land-use and urban planning policies. Ultimately, we must recognize the short-term needs and demands of existing residents– meeting many of those needs and expectations is important for a variety of reasons– but that must be balanced against the overall need of other current residents (and future generations) with less political power. When voting on a zoning case in another district, I do believe that my 80,000+ voting constituents and residents across Austin also often have an interest in my decision– but I do not discount the immediate impacts nearby residents face from urban planning decisions near their homes.

    James “Jimmy” Flannigan (District 6): District 6 suffers when Austin doesn’t build the housing it needs. That housing still gets built, it simply gets built in Cedar Park. That flight to the suburbs drains our resources as a city to fund public safety and city services. The point of 10-1 was to take a city-wide view on issues and not allow any one neighborhood to dictate city-wide policy.

    Don Zimmerman (District 6): There are absolutely property rights clashes between existing owners who expected zoning laws to make things static, and new owners who want to subdivide their lots and/or increase density. Since I believe zoning laws and centralized planning was a mistake from the beginning, I favor a technical focus on infrastructure limitations as density/growth limiter. If new property owners are will to pay for expanded infrastructure, then they should have the right to use that infrastructure for increased density. Ultimately, centralized planners and politicians will fail under the pressure of market forces. In extreme cases like the city of Detroit, it is possible that centralized planners and politicians can destroy the market, but I see the state legislature stepping in before that scenario plays out in Austin.

    Leslie Pool (District 7): My practice is not to choose winners or losers but rather to allow the varying voices in the communities to reach consensus. This promotes community building and is very democratic.

    Natalie Gauldin (District 7): It is important to listen to all stakeholders, but prioritize safety and the long-term needs of the community above everything else. I am campaigning on a platform of transportation and affordability. If I win this seat, I will need to prioritize making Austin a more affordable place to live and work towards removing barriers to using transportation alternatives. I am confident that I can facilitate productive conversations between community members and create win-win solutions for many of the issues I expect to arise in the next four years.

    Sheri Gallo (District 10): The “Austin Process” is frustrating at times, but I also know that it is our greatest asset. I will always listen to ALL voices of the community and neighborhoods. I will also encourage community input, transparency, honesty, trust, inclusiveness, and respectful conversation. This collaboration is going to be the only way to solve these policy issues. The Austin Process only works, I have found, when all sides are engaged and committed to finding solutions.

    Nicholas Virden (District 10): One has to listen to both sides, gather appropriate information, and synthesize all of that information into a plan that does the most good for the most people. As a market analyst at many companies from advertising to real estate, I’ve done this before. I’m constantly addressing stakeholder questions, trying to help the companies that I’ve worked for figure out how to benefit themselves and the interested parties at the other end of the table. I’ll do what I’ve been doing to make beneficial decisions for as many people as I can.

    Alison Alter (District 10): It is the job of a Council member to weigh the merits of any proposal, consider the facts and take into account constituent concerns.

  1. What policies and approaches will you advocate to promote neighborhood improvement, and avoid neighborhood protectionism, as Austin changes and grows?

    Casey Ramos (District 2): I would set up a community registrar for those who would like to work as contractors for the city. Then I would set up a registry of overgrown lots that need to be mowed and cleared of litter. Upon inspection, the resident will be compensated for their work. As for neighborhood protectionism, I do not quite understand why we would not want to protect our neighborhoods and neighbors. As stated earlier, local residents have paid dues for decades and deserve to stay put and not displaced.

    Wesley Faulkner (District 2): I will advocate for an open, honest, and transparent process. There’s a lot of skepticism around backroom deals and shadow negotiations. This sows distrust of government and leaves people questioning who is in who’s pocket. We need to make sure there is adequate time for public input and a rational for each substantial decision. Reasonable people can be reasoned with, and I think these steps will go a long way to move Austin forward.

    Delia Garza (District 2): I support approaches that integrate a diverse set of voices when looking at changes in the fabric of neighborhoods. I also support policies that create balanced and sustainable growth across the City. With the fast growth our City is seeing sometimes change is perceived as negative, but growth also brings positive benefits to our community including amenities and the ability for these neighborhoods to become complete communities with resources that increase as a result of our growth. The best way we can serve the community is by ensuring that we’re creating smart policies that shape growth in a way that encourages affordability and prioritizes housing and development along core transit corridors, while striking compromises to retain the character of neighborhoods.

    Louis C. Herrin, III (District 4): The approach I would be using to advocate neighborhood improvements would be any policy in which I can instill pride in the neighborhood — having good neighbors, upkeeping their homes, and working for the betterness of the neighborhood. Any policy that I would vote for would protect the spirit of the neighborhood. I will not vote for a policy or an ordinance change that would have negative impacts on a neighborhood unless it is something that is good for the city and not for a developer.

    Gregorio “Greg” Casar (District 4): Life is a constant series of changes. I believe in doing our best to create positive change for those folks who need it the most. This guiding principle has helped me support policies that guide growth within the city limits, instead of outside of it- where we can capture revenue for important services, support transit ridership, improve infrastructure, and promote competition in the urban housing market, while being careful to avoid displacement of lower-power residents.

    James “Jimmy” Flannigan (District 6): I support building more housing and community assets along corridors with transportation, ensuring that homeowners easily understand ADU development options, and being extra careful of abusing historic designations.

    Don Zimmerman (District 6): I proposed a “Public Disturbance Task Force” to deal with noise, drunkenness, illegal parking, and other such problems that come from bad behaving STRs or just plain bad neighbors. The task force requires a dedicated APD force to be on call 24/7 to answer 311 noise complaints within 30 minutes. Bad behaving neighbors and lack of police response to keep the peace is a huge part of the bitter conflicts which have come from escalating housing costs and market pressures close to the city core. The city’s current approach is to use “code compliance” bureaucrats to issue citations days after the problems occur, giving the city a new revenue stream at the cost of taxpayers suffering the public disturbance which is never addressed.

    Leslie Pool (District 7): I am not clear on what is intended by “neighborhood protectionism,” but to the extent that each unique area of town can be masters of their own fates – by working through tough issues together and coming up with an agreed solution – by using the tools and options available to them through City regulations and policies and other applicable laws then that’s the most sustainable route. We should support cooperation within neighborhoods – community building, if you will – and encourage resilience in this manner.

    Natalie Gauldin (District 7): I value inclusiveness. My goal will be to engage with all members of the community and educate them on the opportunities they have to provide public input as our city grows. Programs such as the Neighborhood Partnering Program can be used to empower neighbors to work together for a common goal.

    I am very active within the community and attend many of these public input meetings. My hope is that we start collecting better demographic data so we have a record of who it is that is attending the meetings. Nobody should be left out of the process to plan our city, we need to go to the community when the community isn’t coming to us.

    Sheri Gallo (District 10): The best part of 10-1 is the commitment to constituent services to improving and protecting neighborhoods that had been ignored for too long. That commitment and promise of 10-1 is one that I hold very deeply. My office has spent thousands of hours and attended hundreds of meetings that have resulted in new stop signs, new traffic calming devices, safer sidewalks, and better commercial and residential projects for our neighborhoods. As Austin grows, these issues will become more important, but as I said earlier – I do not think this is a binary issue. I believe we can protect neighborhoods and grow at the same time. Community input, transparency, honesty, trust, and keeping the conversation going is the only way to solve these issues.

    Nicholas Virden (District 10): Again, it goes back to scrutinizing and in some cases relaxing zoning and land-use regulation. These laws benefit the NIMBYism that has driven Austin’s housing prices through the roof. As long as we have sustainable development that balances benefits for current and future residents of neighborhoods, we can avoid this protectionism.

    Alison Alter (District 10): I believe we can manage growth responsibly. As we grow we need to plan for the infrastructure needed and not move ahead on a hope and a prayer. We need to find the spot between NIMBY and density at all costs that I call common sense.

  2. What policies will you advocate to address the increasingly unaffordable housing, transportation, and utility costs that are economically segregating our neighborhoods?

    Casey Ramos (District 2): I would ensure that the newly rewritten land development codes match the demographics of those who live in the neighborhood that is being revised. This will help to control the amount of affordable housing that should be built. As for lowering utilities cost I would work with all utility companies to ensure they are running as efficient as possible as to keep their marginal cost low and in turn making these utilities less expensive for residents. Also, I would put incentives into place for those residents who use less water and electricity on average.

    Wesley Faulkner (District 2): I touched on housing in a previous answer. As for transportation I would push for a multi-modal solution to this very complicated problem. Sidewalks, bike lanes, and pedestrian bridges should be built out so that people can live and work in their area without the need for a car. We should also have job location diversity, instead of concentrating certain high paying jobs in only affluent locations. Once again, this will allow people to live near where they work, and bring higher paying jobs to lower income locations in town. For those that still need to commute we should augment our bus system with PRT and light rail. The city should also research alternative funding for the city. This could be done by taking an equity stake in Austin based start-ups, or starting an endowment that will grow over time. By having this additional funding the city could lower taxes, reduce the fees of city owned utilities, and invest in services to enrich the lives and the future of its citizens.

    Delia Garza (District 2): I have prioritized working on increasing affordable housing across the City, and will continue these efforts if I have the opportunity to serve District 2 for a second term. I will advocate for policies that increase the availability of jobs and housing located along a core transit corridors with access to a reliable public transportation system, which provides affordable choices for residents.As a Capital Metro Board Member, I am excited to see the outcome of the Connections 2025 outreach and how we can improve our transit system throughout our City. By working to develop an ecosystem that supports connecting affordable housing with access to jobs and multimodal transit options, we can greatly improve quality of life for many lower and middle income residents.I’m also proud that we were able to decrease Austin Energy rates for all residential tiers. We need to run our utilities in a way that doesn’t require us to depend on high usage to keep our business model stable. We must instead increase education about conservation and ensure that all of our conservation programs are available to all residents regardless of income to both protect our environment and improve affordability for our rate payers.

    Louis C. Herrin, III (District 4): Austin has a supply and demand problem for housing in the City as a whole. The City has a limited supply of houses and we are growing at a rate of 130 people per day. At this rate, the City cannot catch up with the needed homes. I recommend that the City changes the process to make it easier for developers to develop open tracks of land. The City should not be putting burdens on the developers such as requiring a minimum wage to pay their employees, telling them who to hire as their employees, and going through unneeded review processes. We need to streamline the permitting review process for developments and have better training for the City staff so that the developer can get a consistent review of their projects. Transportation is going to be problem for our grand, grandchildren. We are paying for the sins of our past city councils in which they turned down money to expand and improve the road systems. We need to explore options to improve our roads system, i.e., our buses, gondolas, trains, etc. while we ensure we are using our money wisely. The City of Austin’s utility costs will be going up in the future. The policies we need to put in place is to wean the City from using the profits from our utility systems to run the City’s budget. We need to make the profits go back into upgrading and maintaining the utilities in an efficient and environmentally safe order. By doing this, we should be able to keep the rates at manageable level or below the average level the rest of the State is paying.

    Gregorio “Greg” Casar (District 4): We’ve brought together a broad coalition of stakeholders to support Austin’s Fair Housing Initiative: the multi-part resolution overwhelmingly passed, but we have a lot of work to do to implement the increased funding goals, increased housing capacity, and better calibrated density bonuses it calls for. I believe in supporting public transportation through improved land use and by ensuring our corridor plans prioritize transit. I’ll be working over the course of the next year to improve Austin Energy’s weatherization program which primarily serves homeowners, but which would have the most benefit for low-income tenants in older housing stock who cannot otherwise reduce their energy usage.

    James “Jimmy” Flannigan (District 6): I support increasing housing supply, including missing-middle, especially in areas with existing and supportive infrastructure already in place. We can’t just sprawl our way to affordability but instead should focus development on transit corridors. I also support ADUs and other age-in-place housing models. In terms of transit, we need to ensure our corridors are connected. We maximize the use of public transit when it is reliable and accessible. We need to finish the sidewalk master plan and the bike master plan, we need to ensure park-and-rides have enough parking, and we need a long-term, alternative solution to our traffic problem. With respect to utilities, we have to fundamentally change Austin Water’s business model where we are not charging people more money to use less of a precious resource. I also support a citizen-led monitoring and auditing of water readings to ensure accuracy.

    Don Zimmerman (District 6): I will demand a stop to unaffordable, unsustainable subsidized housing projects (such as TDHCA 9% tax credit projects falsely called “affordable housing” by my opponents), and fight to repeal the top 10 ordinances (e.g. “tree” and “visitibility” ordinances) which dramatically increase housing cost with little or no benefit to residents. We also need to stop ridiculing and restricting the original market affordable choice – the suburban home. Finally, we need expanded freeways, especially an outer west side Austin loop to finally connect SH-45 at Lakeline Mall all the way to I-35 south. Most grown up Texas cities are on their 3rd loop — it’s time for Austin to have some adults on Council so we can get our first. And for “utilities”, we need new city management in Austin Water, and we need to abolish the wasteful monopoly called “Austin Energy”.

    Leslie Pool (District 7): See answer to question 1. Austin has a booming economy and I won’t be satisfied until the prosperity enjoyed by some is shared broadly to all of Austin. Our spectacular growth comes with difficult challenges; it’s not a new problem: Previous Councils have struggled to handle the infrastructure challenges explosive growth brings. We have some new ideas – Neighborhood Preservation Districts … linkage fees … an Affordability Trust Fund – and we’re working on more.

    Natalie Gauldin (District 7): The most important upcoming issue is the rewrite of our land development code (CodeNEXT). I hope to help this city diversify its housing stock so a greater diversity of residents can live in our neighborhoods. As we build more housing choices, individuals will have more opportunities to live in areas that are walk/bike friendly and supported by public transit. As we increase density in thoughtful ways, we increase the viability of frequent mass transit. Over time, I’d like to see everyone to be given the opportunity to live in this city without a car.

    I’m concerned that the current council has chosen to reduce the amount homeowners have to pay in property taxes, but increased the flat fees listed within our utility bills. This is a very regressive system; the renters and poorest within our communities receive the fewest (or no) benefits. I will push to limit utility costs and flat fees for the average consumer.

    Sheri Gallo (District 10): The first priorities have to be affordability and transportation.For Austin to be more affordable the City Council must control spending, slow down financial burdens from increasing property tax and utility bills and make it easier to bring new housing stock across all economic levels and into all areas of the city. I have heard very clearly from homeowners and renters that our city is becoming more and more unaffordable. Addressing financial relief for our community is a priority for me, and in good conscience I could not support a budget that increased property taxes and raised utility bills and therefore voted against the 2016-17 budget. I support continuing to increase the Senior tax exemption to keep the tax bills of our senior and disabled population from increasing every year. Allowing our senior population the option of saying in their homes and aging in place not only is the best option for most seniors but adds stability to neighborhoods. I also support the commitment the Council made last year to reach a 20% homestead exemption in 4 years. As Chair of the Austin Energy Oversight Committee, I am very proud of the AE rate reduction settlement agreement that lowers utility bills for all rate classes.I will continue to advocate for a diversity of housing options and reducing the obstacles which make it difficult to produce housing in a timely manner. We need to make sure that thousands of new housing units are built every year for many years to come. These policy objectives will help make Austin more affordable.

    I support the Imagine Austin plan’s vision of complete and connected communities which encourages the development of multi-use neighborhoods where people have the option to live close to work, shopping and services. This will keep more cars off of our already gridlocked roads and will reduce people’s transportation costs. Making our transportation system work better and increasing the efficiency and availability of all modes of transit will also allow greater diversity of population to live in our neighborhoods.

    The remaining 2013 affordable housing bond needs to be invested as wisely and strategically as possible.

    Increasing the amount and diversity of housing throughout Austin can be accomplished with a balanced plan which includes adding density in high demand neighborhoods but at the same time protecting the character of those neighborhoods.

    Nicholas Virden (District 10): We need to adopt a more pro-business, pro-development stance when it comes to our local rules and regulations. Where there are more choices, there are lower prices. It starts with
    (1) letting other bus companies compete against Cap Metro instead of subsidizing a business that is losing money, isn’t frequent enough, and does a sub-par job at relieving congestion in our growing city;
    (2) relaxing zoning and land-use regulation and streamlining our snail-speed permitting process so we can build more housing in more places while maintaining safety and quality standards so residents can choose more places to live, desegregating our city; and
    (3) privatizing our city utilities that the city council uses as a crutch to fund shortfalls in the budget and dumps off the costs to taxpayers in the form of higher utility bills. If we privatize it and let utilities compete, we’ll see lower prices.

    Alison Alter (District 10): I advocate imposing linkage fees to provide the resources necessary for the dispersal of affordable housing throughout the community. I also support investments in education and job training that create opportunities for economic mobility. I also want to improve our multi-modal system to reduce the cost of transportation.

Candidate Questionnaires from Other Organizations