From The Dais: The Shameful Displacement of 100 Families and Affordable Housing In The Name Of Student Housing

eWhen this item came up on the Agenda, I hadn’t made up my mind on this issue and have been actively listening to all sides. I’m glad all sides are finally in the room to hear the different perspectives.  To be honest, there’s a lot to unpack:

I sympathize with the students. I appreciate the earnestness of their needs. I hear the pain and sacrifice of the existing residents and families who have built a life in the community. This oasis of affordability is about to be given away to the college district with our taxes and bonds.

What was most amazing was the attitude of the Foothill-DeAnza college district. Based on the way the administration has been addressing this city council and their bewilderment that our city and its residents have a voice, it’s apparent that th administration is using the students as pawns in this conversation.  Moreover, they will be saddling them with more debt with student housing.

How did we get here? Well,  the district is trying to cover up for their inaction over time and are more than happy to dismiss existing city resident’s needs. They didn’t even think the city and its residents would act to defend affordable housing for existing residents. The district administrators did not see the city and the residents as equal partners in the ecosystem. Now they are here in the audience angry, upset, hoping to bully our city residents to bend to their needs. It’s not right.

It really comes down to some questions:

1. Are we as a city saying it’s okay to ignore our 90 resident families and relocate them for student and staff housing?

2. Are housing advocates really supporting the displacement of all the 67 kids in the district?

3. Is it okay to displace families when the college has the means to build newer and safer housing for students?

4. Is this what bond payers and residents thought the bonds should be used for?

5. Did you really want Measure G bonds to be spent this way?

6. Why can’t the college district build housing on their own land?

7. Do we believe that it’s okay for the district to ignore the city as
   as stakeholder and not even bother to speak with the city?

8. Do we want to get rid of this affordable multi-family housing?

This is what has happened. to our city by a callous college district who has failed their students, the bond payers, and the residents of Cupertino. There is precedence for the city’s desire for a moratorium. San Francisco passed ordinances to protect their residents and housing affordability. Our residents are being displaced. Our schools will be impacted.

The college district has many options, But the main thing is they can choose not to do is cruelly displace families and students and harm Cupertino residents.

I now support the moratorium b/c we need a discussion and the college district needs to own up. This is not how we thought our tax dollars would have been used.

I’m worried about the lost of city / local control when the state owns our land. The veiled threats by the President of the college district today were not welcomed. That being said, the Measure G bonds were for student housing and I still support this.

For Prometheus, they have a reputation of doing better. Their threat to sue would be counter to its brand and reputation.  We met. And I am disappointed in their response.

We should all be having a dialogue that benefits all stakeholders. We have rushed into a deal without having done the due diligence. We need to all meet at the table and come up with mutual win-wins

I will support the moratorium and resolution and urge my fellow council members to do so.