Advocates for homeless individuals and families eagerly anticipated the fruition of Fremont’s application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for Project Homekey funds. Although the Motel 6 site chosen was controversial, sparking debate, program goals were laudable. After all, the plan would create 156 units of permanent housing in an area of astronomical real estate valuation and exorbitant rent.
A commensurate “living wage” in the Bay Area stretches to six figures. Add rampant inflation to the mix and even middle-class households are hard-pressed to maintain a roof over their heads. Homekey is a government response, awarding funds to communities for affordable housing. This includes conversion of existing transient housing (hotels, motels, etc.) to “permanent supportive housing.” Millions of dollars have already been released by the State through two “rounds” of the program and the City of Fremont waited for its acceptance letter in the second round.
On July 22nd, an update from the city gave disappointing news. A brief statement indicated that the application had been rejected due to “technical” issues. Although given five days to respond and staff assurances that the proposal, as submitted was a “good project,” the decision was made to abandon it for a new application in a future round of Homekey awards. A question that remains unanswered is why, if the State objection was technical and might have been corrected without the time and expense of a new application, did the City fail to pursue an appeal or correction?
This misstep highlights a larger issue that has faced Fremont for quite a long time. Periodically, citizen groups have questioned whether General Law status is appropriate for Fremont. Most other cities with populations similar or exceeding Fremont’s – some even smaller – have opted to become a “charter” city. It may be time to revisit the argument for a change from the proscribed provisions of a General Law City and convert to a charter with the possibility of a strong mayor form of executive authority. The city council has been able to evade responsibility for problems such as the prior City Manager Mark Danaj debacle and other administrative issues by deferring to a city manager or blending into group think. Fremont has grown in population and influence, so too should its organizational structure.
With salary creep toward full-time status, the mayor and council should assume more responsibility for the day-to-day operations of the city and, in turn, answer directly to the public for staff decisions. In the current political environment, the mayor is focused on the coming election for higher office and there is obvious friction within the council. This can weaken any resolve to solve internal issues and leave the city under the control of staff. Many of these people are seasoned professionals who deserve credit for their service to the community, but it may be time for our elected leaders to find the lost keys to the city.
