A decision on ballot language could turn the campaigns for Santa Cruz’s ballot measures
On the surface, last week’s Santa Cruz City Council vote seemed fairly simple. The city’s political representatives approved the exact verbiage voters will see when they open their ballots this fall to decide on two competing housing measures. Last week’s special meeting didn’t involve the kind of decision-making that necessarily leaps off the agenda; yet, as is often the case in government work, the power here lies in the details, and those details could very well shift the campaign strategies behind both measures.
The housing measures are similar in name and kind, but differ in degree. The Workforce Housing Affordability Act of 2025, and the Workforce Housing and Climate Protection Act of 2025, each propose citywide parcel taxes, as well real estate transfer taxes to be tacked onto home sales. Through higher proposed taxes, the former estimates bringing in $5 million per year to fund affordable housing construction; the latter, with a softer tax burden, expects to raise only $1-2 million per year.
But the differing numbers and tax percentages might confuse voters. At least that was city attorney Tony Condotti’s concern when he drafted the language approved by the city council last week. Thus, ballots this fall will explicitly state that the Workforce Housing Affordability Act is “Housing Santa Cruz County-sponsored” and the Workforce Housing and Climate Protection Act is “Santa Cruz County Association of Realtors-sponsored.”
This is a rare, if not unprecedented, move in crafting local ballot language. So, I called Condotti to ask why the city would include explicit verbiage about the measures’ sponsors. He immediately sought to defend his neutrality as the ballot author.
“First of all, I challenge you to tell me they’re not neutrally written,” was the first thing Condotti said. “The measures are almost identical except for the numbers. The language is my effort to help the voters distinguish between the two measures.”
In feeling a need to go further than just numbers, Condotti appeals to a certain notion of voter attention. The ballot language clearly lays out the differences between the measures, but does so in dollar figures, decimals and percentages.
Communicating those distinctions between two similarly named and shaped measures was sure to pose a challenge for the campaigns. But now, with Condotti’s approved ballot language, the sides no longer need to hammer voters with $96 vs. $50, or $1.8 million vs. $4 million, or 0.5% vs. 2%. It can be much simpler: Housing Santa Cruz County vs. Santa Cruz County Association of Realtors.
Elaine Johnson, executive director of Housing Santa Cruz County, said because the measures’ names are so similar, the ballot language offers voters an “important” distinction. However, she said it is too early to tell if it will change Housing Santa Cruz County’s campaign effort.
“When the realtors stepped in, their intent was to confuse voters, so we will take this information and make sure it’s clear whose measure is whose,” in talking to voters, Johnson said. “Strategy conversations are beginning to happen. When the realtors came in with their measure, we learned a thing or two. We need to make it really clear that this measure is ours.”
Victor Gomez, director of government affairs for the local realtors association, said the campaign “will be won at front doors and talking to voters,” regardless of what the ballot language says.
“If we want to win, we need to make sure we distance ourselves from them,” Gomez said. “We are going to run a strong campaign for our measure, and a strong opposition campaign against their measure.”
OF NOTE
Santa Cruz’s downtown library project is not late, the city swears: A June 30 deadline that turned into a late July deadline is now an Aug. 21 deadline for the City of Santa Cruz to break ground on its long-awaited mixed-use downtown library and affordable housing project. Earlier this year, the project received approval for federal low-income housing tax credits. That money typically comes with a commitment to break ground within six months. However, as William S. Woodhams reports, the city received a pair of deadline extensions and all is running smoothly.
Santa Cruz County abandons the blockchain: A couple years ago, Santa Cruz County officials hyped a partnership with fintech startup Humbl Inc., to build a digital wallet for county residents to store government-issued permits and passes. However, the county announced last week it would abandon the effort. Information Services Department head Tammie Weigl told me blockchain technology represents a Ferrari, and documents like pool passes and development permits really just need a simple Toyota.
The passenger rail project still needs to find money for environmental analysis: As the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission’s passenger rail project continues to move forward, my colleague Max Chun reports that the agency still needs $14-16 million for critical environmental analysis. In order to get that funding, the commission may need to rethink how it distributes local transportation money across the county and four cities.
POINTS FOR PARTICIPATION
Santa Cruz’s downtown expansion faces final Coastal Commission hurdle: After years of development, the Santa Cruz City Council in May approved a plan to reshape its downtown and concentrate dense and tall redevelopment in the area south of Laurel Street. Now, the plan faces one final approval from the California Coastal Commission, which will meet on Wednesday at 9 a.m. to decide whether the city’s ambitions align with the state’s vision for coastal development.
Santa Cruz City Council returns: And it’s the kind of agenda you’d expect to return to after more than a month off. The city will hold a hearing and vote on an appeal of Workbench’s Clocktower Center, the county’s most talked-about development project since last spring. The city council is also expected to approve the final agreements on the Cruz Hotel, a similarly high-profile proposal to put a luxury hotel at the corner of Front and Laurel streets. The wharf will also make a cameo, as the city will decide how, exactly, to rebuild the structure after intense swells tore off 150 feet of piles and planks last winter.
ONE GREAT READ
An interview with poet, essayist and novelist Fanny Howe | The Paris Review, Summer 2025
These days, in our somehow diluted-yet-contracting media environment, you can find poetry, short stories and essays in innumerable magazines and blogs. But the longform interview remains elusive, and no one has yet been able to replicate the standard set decades ago by The Paris Review. The publication has always aspired to provide readers with a true inter-view, as in, a view of the internal, which has allowed the interviews to so easily transcend readers’ familiarity with a subject.
This summer’s edition features Chloe Garcia Roberts interviewing poet, essayist and novelist Fanny Howe, who died on July 8 — right around the same time the issue went to publication. One needn’t be acquainted with Fanny Howe’s work to appreciate the conversation. I certainly wasn’t, yet I came away with a deeper understanding of how family and personal life permeates and often alters one’s creative work.