The Coast News has asked candidates for Solana Beach City Council to participate in questionnaires about their stances on issues impacting the city.
On the Solana Beach City Council, three incumbents are running unopposed for three open seats this November — Mayor Lesa Heebner, District 1 Councilmember Dave Zito and District 3 Councilmember Jewel Edson.
While there are no challengers in the race, candidates were still asked to respond to questions about the city’s top issues and their plans for the upcoming term. Heebner and Edson participated in the questionnaire, and Zito did not respond to multiple emails.
Q: How should the city balance state-mandated housing requirements and development standards with the need for local control and compliance with the Coastal Act?
HEEBNER: We have no choice but to follow the state-mandated housing requirements. The State sues Cities that don’t, resulting in expensive litigation and even more stringent mandates and financial penalties. Unfortunately, based on what we’re seeing in Solana Beach, the State’s approach to solving the affordable housing crisis is resulting in fewer affordable homes despite many projects being built here.
Since we’re largely built out, each new housing project replaces an older “naturally affordable” development, resulting in a net loss of affordable places to live.
Additionally, I’d prefer the State would require affordability levels for developers rather than thinking more supply will lower prices. In a desirable location like Solana Beach, no matter the increase in supply, demand will always exceed it, keeping prices high. I will continue to lobby our legislators to honor the Coastal Act, to re-think their approach to one-size-fits-all statewide housing mandates, and to support RHNA Reforms.
EDSON: Through a careful balanced approach. At approximately 3.4 square miles, Solana Beach is the second smallest city in San Diego County. Our population falls well below the State’s definition of a “small city,” and our entire city falls within the Coastal Zone.
As a built-out, suburban, coastal city that lacks freely developable land, balancing Coastal and HCD’s often opposing mandates can be a challenge. I support both the healthy growth of our housing stock at all levels of affordability and the Coastal Act’s protection and preservation of our sensitive coastal habitat. Like the third leg in a three-legged stool, local control allows our small coastal city to balance the expectations of both State agencies.
Unfortunately, state housing bills are undermining this balance. Their one-size-fits-all approach favors development and developers at the expense of coastal preservation, careful city planning, naturally affordable housing, diverse neighborhoods and quality of life.
Q: Should the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process be reformed, and if so, what would that look like?
HEEBNER: Yes, especially in light of SB 423, which mandates cities must produce half their RHNA allocation by mid-cycle (June 2025) or lose local land use authority over multi-family development. No city within the Region (or likely the State) will meet this.
The State is considering future reforms, but we need reforms to the current cycle to change the mid-point mandate to a “good faith effort” standard. Second, allow each region to look at its allocation holistically so housing can be built where it makes the most sense, such as near job centers. And RHNA needs to come with funding.
For Solana Beach to ensure developers build our affordable housing allocation (635), our only tool is our 15% inclusionary policy. We’d need to add 4,200 homes to our housing stock of 6,400 to yield 630 affordable units. At $700,000 per unit, who pays that $444.5 million? What RHNA asks is impossible to accomplish.
EDSON: The need exists to produce additional housing as well as reform our region’s Cycle 6 and future RHNA process. The methodology adopted in Cycle 6 was flawed. If not for the weighted vote at SANDAG, our region would have self-corrected to adopt more equitable allocations.
The will of a few high-population cities should not have overruled a common-sense reallocation supported by the majority of cities. The RHNA process must be realistic, obtainable and based on up-to-date population and economic data. More equitable allocations alone are not the solution. Without RHNA reform, our entire region may be out of compliance by mid-cycle.
Punishing cities and residents by handing over control to developers is not the answer. The answer lies in collaborative solutions between all stakeholders, HCD, the cities and metropolitan planning organizations. Meaningful differences from city to city and cities’ ability to absorb additional housing units must be considered.
Q: How would you ensure fiscal responsibility as a council member? What are some ways that the city can raise revenues?
HEEBNER: Last election, Solana Beach residents passed Measure S with 67% of the vote, even though it required only 50% plus one vote. This one-penny sales tax goes directly into our coffers for the benefit of our streets, public safety, clean beaches and improved parks.
This fiscal year, we had a $6 million surplus, which we prudently allocated to our Asset and Facilities Replacement Funds, the Lomas Santa Fe Improvement project, Marine Safety Center, Pension and Retiree Health Benefit Funds, and reserves.
For additional revenues, we could look to increase our Transient Occupancy Tax (paid for by visitors) to improve beach access and safety, including paying for our new Marine Safety Center.
EDSON: Throughout my tenure on the Solana Beach City Council, I’ve consistently supported local businesses and prioritized protecting and growing my city’s fiscal health. This includes campaigning for the 2022 approval of Measure S, which has essentially doubled our General Fund.
The passage of Measure S by a strong majority of voters demonstrated support for the council’s prudent fiscal policies, confidence in the city’s management of our precious resources and residents’ desire to maintain and improve their quality of life.
As a small business owner, who values financial responsibility and independence, I will continue prudent financial oversight of the city’s budget, stewardship of our public spaces and building reserves to pay down pension obligations and increase investments in our city’s infrastructure and public safety.
Q: What strategies would you support as a Solana Beach City Council member to ensure the city has a voice in decisions about the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project?
HEEBNER: At the SANDAG Board of Directors meeting, I actively pursued concluding the recent environmental review of the alternatives and starting a new review after conducting a Values Analysis (VA) process which would include ALL stakeholders, not just Del Mar, to develop new and modified alignments.
Solana Beach is actively engaged now in the VA process which will result in a report by the end of the year outlining new and modified alignments. I am on the SANDAG Board, which will choose the alternatives to include in the subsequent environmental documents based on the VA Team’s report and, ultimately, the final alignment.
EDSON: Alternative A’s inclusion in the LOSSAN Rail Realignment project’s Notice of Preparation (NOP) surprised Solana Beach and other impacted stakeholders, including the City of San Diego, Del Mar Fairgrounds, NCTD, LOSSAN/Amtrak, Port of San Diego and the DOD.
In response to Alternative A’s inclusion, I immediately met with Mayor Heebner, city staff and SANDAG representatives. For transparency and constituents’ awareness, SANDAG was invited to present to our City Council. After confirming Alternative A’s impacts, I communicated the city’s concerns widely by interacting with impacted residents, local business leaders and community groups and by speaking out at regional transportation board meetings.
SANDAG received over 1,500 NOP comments, leading them to initiate a Values Analysis study to further evaluate project alternatives. Along with Mayor Heebner, City staff, and other stakeholders, I am participating in the Values Analysis study and in SANDAG’s monthly stakeholder-city meetings.
Q: Would you support any realignment that would require new trenching or drilling of a tunnel within Solana Beach city limits?
HEEBNER: No. The project is to correct a problem in Del Mar and the solution should remain south of the San Dieguito Bridge, south of Via de la Valle. Our residents and businesses already put up with the inconvenience and cost of two years of construction when we lowered the tracks. To demolish and rebuild that regional infrastructure investment for a tunnel makes no sense.
Additionally, we will soon see construction to double-track the southern quarter of our railroad trench. This again will cause inconvenience to our residents and businesses, and to then demolish it for a tunnel is irrational.
EDSON: Given my understanding, any realignment of the tracks off of the Del Mar bluffs that initiates or terminates in Solana Beach would require trenching and tunneling within Solana Beach.
SANDAG representatives have publicly confirmed that construction of a project alternative with a portal in Solana Beach would come at a dramatically higher cost (in the billions) than the proposed realignments that initiate or terminate within the City of Del Mar and would waste hundreds of millions of dollars in regional investment in the LOSSAN corridor, take far longer to construct, disrupt both rail service and Fairgrounds operations, and create unacceptable environmental and economic impacts.
The resulting economic impacts would not be exclusive to Solana Beach residents and businesses located in the immediate vicinity of the rail corridor but would be felt throughout our region. So, for these reasons, my answer is an unequivocal no.