The Coast News has asked local North County candidates to participate in questionnaires about their stances on issues impacting their cities.
Four candidates are running for two seats on the San Marcos City Council this November. Councilmember Ed Musgrove and San Marcos Traffic Commissioner Natasha Zander Hilmes are vying for the District 4 seat, which represents northern San Marcos, including Richland, Santa Fe Hills, and Palomar College.
Attorneys Alan Geraci and Danielle LeBlang are both running for the District 3 seat, held by Councilmember Sharon Jenkins and representing Cal State University San Marcos, North City and the Creek District.
Q: What would you say are the top issues facing your district?
MUSGROVE: We have seen a significant gap in income vs. necessary expenses, and bridging this gap is a significant priority. At the same time, we recognize the need to improve our infrastructure schedule and our public services sector, such as parks and recreation.
Additionally, we recognize the need for a fifth fire station to maintain our high-quality public safety services. All come back to bridge the fiscal gap.
ZANDER HILMES: Some of the top issues in our district include responsible growth, traffic, housing affordability, and the city’s budget deficit. As a long-time resident and member of the Traffic Commission, I’ve seen firsthand how important it is to balance development with preserving the character of San Marcos.
Our infrastructure — roads, schools, and emergency services — needs to keep pace with growth. We also need to prioritize traffic safety and alternative transportation solutions. Addressing housing affordability for families and seniors with a variety of options is crucial.
Lastly, transparency in decision-making is vital to ensuring a future that reflects the needs of our community.
GERACI: San Marcos’s biggest challenge remains a lack of affordable housing. The median home price is $890,000, and the average rent in the city is just below $2,700. Increasing our supply of affordable housing, primarily for seniors and students, is vital. Additionally, we must invest in infrastructure for traffic mitigation and public transportation.
The climate issue is existential, and we must focus our cities’ resources on strengthening our underperforming climate action plan. It is necessary that we become carbon-neutral by 2045, and we focus on collaborating with neighboring cities to address climate change.
As a lawyer, I protected seniors from financial abuse and will continue to fight for income-restricted seniors. I will also return accountability to City Hall by fighting to balance our budget and focus on smart growth solutions, which will generate future revenue for the city. Bottom line: I will fight for you.
LEBLANG: San Marcos is a beautiful city, and as the city continues to grow, traffic has increased. To support new growth while not impacting the quality of life for current residents, we must focus on improving traffic flow by updating infrastructure and modernizing our traffic signals.
Simple steps at the city level will allow you to move safely and easily through our city. Public safety also is a top priority. With our current growth, we need to be vigilant about supporting local law enforcement so every resident feels safe in their homes and businesses.
Additionally, we need to support quality, small business growth. With growth comes opportunity. The San Marcos City Council has the opportunity to create a safe, clean city to attract quality businesses and create new jobs. A healthy economy is vital to a healthy community.
Q: How do you believe the city should balance state-mandated housing requirements while still maintaining local control? Does the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process need to be reformed, and if so, what does that look like?
MUSGROVE: Since we, as a city, don’t build, we have been diligent in zoning for all options and working toward a balanced housing market. We work with our market-rate developers, those who wish to take advantage of tax breaks by offering a percentage of “below-market rate” housing and those who specialize in affordable housing for low-income buyers/renters.
Regarding RHNA, Goals need to be determined at the regional level with less interference from Sacramento. One way to simplify the process would be to allow cities in the region to transfer housing numbers to another city that has capacity in exchange for state tax credits or some other form of consideration.
The state’s stance that cities can be fined for not meeting RHNA goals is ridiculous. If cities are zoning and encouraging a variety of housing, the threat of fines does nothing to encourage a positive relationship with Sacramento.
ZANDER HILMES: Meeting state housing mandates is essential, but local control is equally important to ensure development aligns with San Marcos’ values. Collaboration with neighboring cities can help us pool resources and strategize better. The RHNA process must prioritize affordable housing options for a range of income levels, not just luxury developments. I believe we can shape these mandates to work for our community without sacrificing local needs.
GERACI: San Marcos will meet its RHNA numbers this decade. We have enough high-end housing. We need more affordable housing, which is a basic necessity as our city grows. It is also incredibly important that we maintain citizens’ voices in important decision-making processes related to housing.
Our General Plan Update is now two years past due and was shelved because of the deficit budget, which is also unacceptable. We must abide by state law and allow our local residents and businesses to voice their desires.
The concepts of local control and abiding by state regulations are not mutually exclusive. With good leadership, the two work hand-in-hand. As a city council member, I will pledge to push for a General Plan update, meet the community’s needs with smart growth decisions, and continue to protect our environment and open spaces.
LEBLANG: Local control is essential to preserving San Marcos’ unique character, housing diversity, and maintaining the quality of life we value. The city does not directly develop properties, but zoning plays a critical role in new development and housing. While I recognize the need for additional housing offered at a range of prices, we need to ensure smart development for new housing.
At the state level, Sacramento has provided mandates that localities may struggle to meet. I believe that the Regional Housing Needs Allocation system should be reformed to allow for stronger local control, which will ensure that San Marcos is able to shape its own future.
Q: What actions would you propose in order to improve the city’s response to the local homelessness crisis, and do you believe the city should play a more active role in connecting homeless individuals and residents displaced from residential projects (such as the Villa Serena project last year) to housing resources?
MUSGROVE: We have consistently engaged local and regional services to improve the outlook for homeless persons in our city. Our approach is to engage, identify realistic opportunities for our homeless and follow through to ensure services are available.
This process has led to some successes in reuniting homeless members with their families in and outside our region. We will continue to discourage unsafe practices such as living without proper shelter that meets basic needs.
At the same time, we are encouraging the building of new affordable housing, such as the recently completed Villa Serena apartment homes. We acknowledge this project ran into some issues with temporary housing for the residents, but our housing team worked with the developer and residents to ensure temporary housing was available until residents were able to move into their new homes.
ZANDER HILMES: Yes, the city should play a more active role in supporting displaced residents and addressing homelessness. The Villa Serena project showed how critical it is to advocate for those facing displacement. We need to be more proactive in providing resources and collaborating with other cities to find successful solutions. Compassion and action should guide our response to homelessness.
GERACI: Our homeless problem is inexcusable. The homeless population is up 1,650% in San Marcos over the last census. We need to invest in a homeless shelter and provide wraparound services for houseless and homeless folks.
The handling of the Villa Serena project by city leadership was unimpressive. Displacement from housing is a public concern, and we need to work with property ownership to bridge the gap of displacement. Relocation services should be paid for by the owners who seek to remodel their properties and displace families.
Broadly speaking, homelessness is a complex, multifaceted problem that requires complex and innovative solutions. Working jointly with our North County neighbors, we can have an impact on helping individuals and families who face the threat or are already homeless.
LEBLANG: The San Marcos City Council recently implemented a homeless encampment ordinance, similar to other cities throughout the county, which I support. The ordinance focuses on compassionately providing local and county resources to displaced individuals.
Moving forward, I believe the City Council should continue to play an active role in providing for all residents wherever possible.
The city should engage federal and state funding sources to increase resources and support existing homelessness response plans. Leveraging local programs and diverse funding sources will allow San Marcos to serve the needs of every resident.
Q: How would you ensure fiscal responsibility as a council member, and what are some ways that the city can raise revenues?
MUSGROVE: We own properties where we receive sales tax revenues and/or lease payments. These revenues can be sensitive to economic fluctuations but have generally been a steady source of income for the city.
Our other primary source of income is through property taxes. It’s unfortunate that San Marcos sits at the very bottom of the 18 incorporated cities on the apportioned rate at 6.6%. This rate was determined many years ago at the inception of Prop 13 rates/apportionments.
We must provide expected and necessary city services such as infrastructure maintenance, street lights, signal lights, parks and recreation services, etc., with the lowest property tax rate and the base sales tax rate. After much consideration, we voted as a council to offer residents the option to raise the sales tax rate by one penny. The city decided to provide information to the residents so that they could make an informed decision on Election Day.
ZANDER HILMES: We must update the General Plan — it’s overdue. Delaying this update could cost the city financially, and we can’t afford to keep allowing exceptions. Instead of blaming Prop 13 or external factors, we need to seek new revenue streams, such as recreational cannabis dispensaries, while maintaining fiscal discipline.
GERACI: Our budget has been in deficit for several fiscal cycles. Our City Manager has been forthright in explaining that we cannot manage the budget by cutting vital services anymore. We have a revenue problem mostly caused by the lack of property tax revenue shared with San Marcos. The first step is to pass Measure Q, which is on the ballot this year.
This one-cent district sales tax on non-essential purchases would raise approximately $20 million in the first fiscal cycle after implementation. It comes with citizen oversight so that there is accountability, too. We can also explore the economic development of cannabis in the city, which is answered next.
LEBLANG: As your Councilmember, my priority will be to uphold fiscal discipline while maintaining essential services such as fire, law enforcement, parks, and infrastructure updates. These services are crucial to ensuring San Marcos remains safe while providing for growth and resident quality of life.
As a City Council member, I will focus on leveraging my legal expertise to explore options that diversify our revenue streams while reallocating our budget to continue providing the quality services our residents have come to expect. Our residents also have an opportunity to actively participate in the budget process.
This year, there is a Measure Q ballot initiative, which will provide an additional revenue stream to the city. All the revenue from this initiative will stay in our city and will be used to support public safety, parks, and infrastructure updates.
Q: Also, on the topic of revenues, would you support allowing recreational cannabis dispensaries in San Marcos and establishing an associated cannabis sales tax to increase city revenues? Why or why not?
MUSGROVE: I am open to the discussion. My chief concern has always been how the federal government categorized cannabis on the schedule of controlled substances and why. With it being moved to a lesser degree, my remaining concern is how we determine a safe level of THC as an intoxicant in a public environment.
I would like to see California work with our research universities to establish quantifiable levels of intoxication to ensure law enforcement and medical service providers have a baseline to determine impairment/intoxication as it corresponds to safe vehicle operation and an ability to ensure the intoxicated person can care for themself.
There is no doubt a revenue stream could be realized from the controlled sales of cannabis, but I believe we first owe our community standards for how we address public issues from the intoxicating effects of THC.
ZANDER HILMES: Yes, I would support recreational cannabis dispensaries with proper regulations. Clear zoning, safety, and health guidelines are crucial to protect the community. The revenue from a cannabis sales tax could fund key city services like public safety and infrastructure, helping San Marcos grow responsibly.
GERACI: When Measure Z (medical marijuana) and Measure AA (recreational marijuana sales) passed in Vista in 2018, leaders throughout North County waited to see the results. Tax revenue from cannabis sales is north of $7 million per year. Vista had the unique problem of how to allocate all the extra revenue. General Fund? Special Fund? What a unique problem for taking a progressive risk.
The revenues have evolved into special scholarships for youth, including sports, arts, camps, support programs and other extra-curricular activities. The unintended surplus revenue has also resulted in improvements in public safety, like street lighting, park rangers, upgrades to park restrooms and playgrounds and more.
The fearmongering about “increasing crime” and bringing in the riffraff is all unfounded. When I am on the San Marcos City Council, I will task the city with following our neighbors’ footsteps and boosting our budget by bringing cannabis business to San Marcos.
LEBLANG: Prior to supporting any new measure, I would want to carefully review its impact on the community and conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis. Understanding the experiences of other cities that have approved cannabis dispensaries would help me assess the potential benefits and drawbacks over time.
It’s essential that any new development or initiative aligns with San Marcos’ values and culture. My top priority will always be ensuring that our city remains safe and prosperous and that any new revenue generated through initiatives stays in our city to support the quality of life our residents deserve.
