Political chaos has erupted in this Peninsula city over housing
[ad_1]
Trouble brewing since the November election has erupted into open conflict on the San Mateo City Council: Its mayor faces a recall campaign, the District Attorney’s Office has investigated allegations of vote-trading and lying, and the council will discuss creating a code of conduct at its next meeting.
While those involved say politics and personal histories play a role in the turmoil, the chaos that has consumed the elected leadership of the Peninsula city comes down, in large part, to one thing: housing.
It’s the same conflict playing out in many cities in the Bay Area, where the state’s mandate to build nearly half a million housing units by 2030 has met fierce resistance from residents opposed to growth in their communities. But in San Mateo, an affluent city of 102,000, the dispute is central to a power struggle among factions in the city that threatens to bring down pro-housing Mayor Amourence Lee.
Michael Weinhauer, a longtime San Matean and community activist who is spearheading Lee’s attempted ouster, said that the drive to recall her was the result of her being “disdainful” and unwilling to compromise — but how the city will meet its state-mandated goal of 7,000 new units over the next eight years “ties directly to this conversation.”
“Many of us are concerned about the level of development and how that’s going to affect San Mateo as a suburban city,” he said, adding that he believes state goals can be met while preserving existing height and density limits, despite letters from the state saying otherwise. “Amourence does not represent all San Mateans.”
Lifelong San Matean and pro-housing activist Jordan Grimes agreed that more than just recent politics was at play.
“Housing is the linchpin, but it’s really a power struggle between an older generation and new generation and competing visions for the future of San Mateo,” he told The Chronicle. “It really does come back to what the city looks like … who is allowed to live here.”
San Mateo Mayor Amourence Lee is the target of a recall campaign over her housing stance.
Jessica Christian/The Chronicle 2020Council election and the balance of power
The drama around Lee started in December, when the balance of power on the City Council over housing decisions was at stake in the wake of the recent election.
Three of San Mateo’s five City Council seats were up for grabs in November, when newcomers Adam Loraine, Lisa Diaz Nash and Rob Newsom won.
They joined incumbents Lee and Diane Papan, whose seats were not on the ballot — but Papan was departing after her election to the state Assembly. That meant the new council would need to appoint her replacement.
In San Mateo, City Council members also appoint the mayor from their own ranks. City Charter guidance says the new council should appoint a mayor at its first meeting, and seniority should be a factor — indicating Lee as the choice.
But that’s where the housing issue loomed large. Had the members voted Lee in as mayor before the fifth member was appointed, she would have had a tiebreaker vote to select the fifth member in a council split between those who favor growth — Lee and Loraine — and those who oppose it — Diaz Nash and Newsom.
That meant the council would likely end up with a pro-housing majority.
At its first meeting Dec. 5, Diaz Nash and Newsom blocked Lee’s appointment, saying they needed to fill Papan’s vacancy first.
The meeting was eight hours long, with council members and public commenters debating the best course of action between multiple failed attempts to vote Lee in as mayor.
“Importantly, the mayor has tiebreaker authority… when appointing the all-important fifth council member, keeping in mind that hundreds of millions of dollars in land use decisions are going to be made in the next year,” Weinhauer said at the meeting, in favor of blocking the mayoral appointment.
Newsom did not respond to The Chronicle’s request for comment, and Diaz Nash said she was reserving any comments on the matter for the upcoming council meeting Monday.
The dispute over housing mandates in San Mateo has led to a power struggle among City Council members.
Samantha Laurey/Special to The ChronicleTensions explode
The discussion continued at a Dec. 7 special meeting, which went on for five hours — with Diaz, Nash and Newsom again blocking Lee’s appointment to mayor. The decision was pushed off to the next council meeting, where the council would also select its fifth member.
That’s when tensions erupted into open conflict.
At the Dec. 12 meeting, the council was first tasked with voting in its fifth member. After hearing from the candidates and nearly 100 public commenters, the members cast their votes. Diaz Nash and Newsom voted for longtime community leader Cliff Robbins, while Lee and Loraine abstained.
Then Lee made the explosive allegations that have become the focal point of the recall effort against her: She said two “messengers” had approached her to vote for a certain candidate in exchange for a vote supporting her for mayor.
Then, in a dramatic flourish, she pulled the name of the alleged candidate from a manila envelope: Cliff Robbins.
Robbins denied vehemently at the meeting that he had been involved in any vote trading.
“I have never engaged in any sort of vote, exchange, or bartering, nor have I authorized anybody to do so and I find an unsupported accusation subjecting this entire city to the possibility of a suit for defamation,” he told the council members. “I am appalled.”
In the end, the council members voted in community leader Rich Hedges for the fifth seat. Hedges is slightly more in line with pro-housing groups, and Lee had identified him as her first choice earlier in the meeting.
“During this chaotic and fateful week our appointment process to fill a council seat was tainted,” Lee wrote in a blog post. She said she does not believe Robbins, whom she called “a great contributor to our community,” was involved in the alleged vote trading, but was instead “caught in the cross-hairs.”
The dispute over housing mandates in San Mateo is seen by some as a clash between the old political establishment and the new.
Samantha Laurey/Special to The ChronicleInvestigation by D.A.’s Office
The city attorney requested the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office investigate the allegations, to uncover whether state open meeting laws had been violated. It concluded last month that nothing criminal had occurred — though it found “inconsistent statements” from the involved parties regarding what had happened in the lead-up to the council member and mayoral appointments that “all involved discussion of political outcomes should one course or another be taken.”
Opposing sides interpreted the investigation findings differently. On April 17, Lee’s supporters said the investigation showed political games being played, while her critics said it proved she lied and needlessly sullied the reputation of an innocent community member.
Lee, who calls Robbins a dear friend, said her actions showed that her integrity and that of the council remain her top priority as she was willing to risk relationships to expose the alleged improper behavior.
“This has cost me dearly,” she told The Chronicle, referring to the friends lost over the matter. “The people can see there’s no price too high, I will always speak hard truths and demand transparency to protect our democracy.”
Weinhauer acknowledged that the recall campaign was in the works before December’s events, but that it’s also a result of a “larger pattern of troubling behavior,” including Lee’s unwillingness to compromise on issues of growth and to treat opponents respectfully.
Divisions in the community
Lee seems to champion the idea that she’s part of a new group of voters who are ascendent. On her campaign website, she wrote: “In San Mateo, a new generation of voters is changing the landscape of our representative government. The Old Guard is losing their grip on power.”
Grimes, the housing advocate, agreed.
“We have this old political establishment that has run the city for a really long time, and they are seeing their power wane,” he said. “We are at a really critical time, and (Lee) has really championed policies to move San Mateo forward in a really progressive way, it’s in direct conflict with what (the old political establishment) wants for the city.”
But Weinhauer said that view is “overly simplistic.”
“Times do change, and the younger generation is always going to have a different view,” he said. But “scorched-earth tactics” in favor of growth are not the way forward, he added.
On Monday, the City Council will again review the district attorney’s report. While the council cannot remove anyone from their seat, they are likely to discuss creating a code of conduct.
In the meantime, it is unclear whether the campaign against Lee will gain enough signatures to prompt a recall election. Asked how many signatures have been gathered, Weinhauer said they were still being collected and a tally was not yet available.
For her part, Lee said she is hoping to move forward.
“For the sake of our beautiful city, I hope we can close this chapter and start anew. I call for unity — let’s choose to build a foundation for our future, so we can focus on doing the people’s work,” she wrote online.
Reach Danielle Echeverria: danielle.echeverria@sfchronicle.com; Twitter: @DanielleEchev
[ad_2]
Source: News
About The Author
