The City maintains that the sweet spot for developers to build housing in Berkeley is 7 stories. Current zoning requires that buildings of 7 stories include on-site affordable units. Are you in favor of changing the existing zoning in the North Shattuck, Solano, San Pablo and College corridors to allow market rate 7-story buildings so they would not have to include any on-site affordable housing.

No, I am not in favor of removing the on-site affordable housing requirement. Berkeley is woefully behind in meeting its State requirements (RHNA) for affordable housing, much more so than it is in meeting its market rate (read: luxury) housing requirements. Regardless of these artificially set and overly broad RHNA goals, if our city’s development of luxury housing continues to dramatically outpace that of affordable housing at the unprecedented levels we are seeing, we will have a lopsided community with plummeting income diversity. We will fail to support the people that serve the city’s needs. We need to find ways of increasing the proportion of affordable housing to other types of housing, both for the health of our city, and to create a downward pressure on overall housing prices.

City and State policies focus almost exclusively on limited housing supply as the root cause of our current housing affordability crisis. I was a renter for roughly fifteen years and I never paid more than $1000 a month for rent, whether in New York City, San Francisco, Washington D.C. or Oakland (Lake Merritt). Back then, “market rate” meant housing that was affordable for low-to-middle income renters like me. And this was true for decades before my entry into the rental market.

What changed in the past 15 years? Why is it that young folks today look around and see housing that is out of reach for most? Why do young folks face prohibitive rents that are barriers to independence and employment opportunities? Most cities did need to build more housing. And in Berkeley and beyond, we have done that. What our city and State fail to recognize are two key factors in the explosion of housing prices: (1) federal, state, and local laws that limited the stock of affordable housing, for example, the Faircloth Amendment that capped public housing at 1990 levels and (2) real estate market speculation and increased financialization of the housing market.

An effective housing policy will need to address these two challenges. That includes ensuring that affordable housing is incorporated into new zoning updates.

City staff, along with paid consultants, spent several years formulating the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP), engaging with community members and encouraging them to offer their vision for the transformation of San Pablo Avenue. The resulting ideas and recommendations were entirely ignored by the city council. Would you support revisiting the community’s recommendations and incorporating these into whatever final SPASP the council proposes?

Yes, I would support acknowledging and incorporating the community input that City staff gathered into the final version of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. It is unclear why the City Council ignored their Staff’s recommendations, as led by Robert Rivera. These recommendations were based on extensive community engagement. This is a troubling trend.

We have already rezoned to allow a doubling of the city population. Is it necessary to rezone commercial streets specifically for high-density housing to meet our housing goals? What is the maximum number of stories, including the density bonus, you believe preserves the sense of community and human interactions that currently exists in the North Shattuck, Solano, San Pablo, and College corridors?

The maximum number of stories, including density bonuses would depend on the site. In locations that are adjacent to residential areas or single story businesses, I would not recommend more than five-to-six stories. If zoned higher, I recommend pairing that with requirements to develop public spaces that facilitate community connection and expand green space. The Jones Street apartments and new BUSD housing are two examples of five-to-six story buildings that contribute to meeting our City’s housing needs in meaningful ways.

It is also important to acknowledge and study the demographics of those interested in moving or staying in Berkeley. My experience canvassing across our District and observing trends on housing search sites has made it clear to me that – unlike demand for housing in San Francisco and Oakland - the bulk of the demand in our City is from people wanting to start a family or elders who want to continue to afford and remain in our community. A tenth-story luxury apartment does not meet this type of demand.

Council members assert that building market rate housing invariably will lower rents. Yet, as reported this April by the Emeryville Tattler, despite a massive building boom between 2020 and 2024, Emeryville has had a 16.3% year-over-year increase in one-bedroom rents, the largest in the Bay Area. Despite building a substantial amount of market rate housing, Berkeley’s rents are still far from affordable. How do you propose that Berkeley actually build affordable housing for truly low-income (non-student) residents?

Here’s the good news. Berkeley residents have demonstrated a commitment to expanding affordable housing, as expressed in a number of measures that we have passed over the last several years. We voted for Measure O, Measure P, Measure W, and Measure U1, each contributing to funding affordable housing in different ways. Berkeley has used these funds and developer in-lieu housing fees to build several projects across our City.

Proposition 1 on the November ballot is another vehicle for affordable housing expansion, particularly for multifamily housing, and also for low-income home ownership. I would like Berkeley to continue to leverage available funds and work with land trusts and affordable housing non-profits to continue to preserve and develop truly low-income housing.

However, if we are to make significant strides in affordability, we will need to explore new and sustained sources of funding. We have the resources right here in our city to meet affordability goals – we simply need better tools to access such resources. If elected, I would like to work with other local governments to create State legislation that would create a long-term wealth tax that can be used for the purpose of affordable housing preservation and development.

Do you support proposals allowing developers to buy their way out of the requirement to build on-site affordable units in their developments?

I would prefer affordable units to be built on-site, for many reasons, and in part, because the in-lieu “buy out” fees are a fraction of the value of on-site affordable units.

In July 2025, the City Council passed a version of middle housing that went far beyond the state requirements and could potentially double the population of Berkeley, which is already one of the densest cities in California. Do you favor or oppose what the City Council has passed? Should the council continue to pass bills far in excess of what the state requires?

No, it should not. City staff at that City Council meeting communicated that there is no expected affordability benefit from the middle housing proposal. While middle housing may increase housing supply in a slow trickle, what it also does is invite developer interest in our communities. This comes with its own set of challenges.

In my neighborhood, the houses that were sold to developers and flipped were double the price of houses that were sold to families. Developers tend to raze entire properties of trees and vegetation - some of which have been here for half a century or more - to make way for development. There is a higher degree of respect and consideration for neighbors among neighbors than there is from people who see housing, not as a home, but as an investment.

I am not opposed to the population of Berkeley growing. The City also has an obligation to provide necessary infrastructure upgrades and expansion of public green spaces to offset the climate changing heat island effect of such density.

The City Council has limited the ability of Berkeley residents to protect and landmark buildings for their historical, artistic and architectural heritage. Do you favor or oppose the changes that were made by the council?

I recall these changes and the debates leading up to it. I understand the value of historic preservation. Nevertheless, I humbly share that this is not my area of expertise. I am committed to understanding this better.

Will you support a measure to rescind the July 2026 Council vote on Hopkins until a full complete street study, as required by the Bicycle Plan, is concluded? By necessity, it would fully consider budget costs, the possibility of paving with pedestrian improvements only, accessibility issues for all ages and abilities, alternative cycle routes such as Rose and Ada Streets, and include community input meetings.

Yes. The Hopkins Street plan is about accessibility, safety and sustainability. The City has an obligation to conduct a basic study to evaluate the needs of those accessing Hopkins Street and solutions that would meet these needs (for accessibility, safety, and sustainability). In an information vacuum, our community has become divided over competing assumptions and scattered facts. This is tragic, especially for a city as educated and well-resourced as ours. There is no excuse for not having an accurate study after eight years of planning. I am committed to Councilmember Blackaby’s plan to repave Hopkins now, regardless of the outcome of that study.

The biggest safety hazard on Hopkins is its poor pavement condition. Will you support repaving Hopkins now, as originally proposed, with only the pedestrian and other safety improvements, since moving quickly would help avoid further deterioration and the higher costs that come with delay?

Yes.

Critics of current developments have suggested that the City Council consider the concept of a “livable city” as one that honors the environment, human scale buildings, personal relationships centered around community gathering places, safety, and embraces all ages. What is your concept of a livable city?

I am agreement with this vision of a livable city. There is no greater contributor to environmental sustainability, democracy, and personal well-being than a strong community and a real community is multi-generational.