|
PAGE 50
<br />A number of significant housing challenges arose,
<br />many which relate to the lack of affordable housing
<br />stock, especially for people who are low-income.
<br />Housing is best summed up as a need for more:
<br />more affordable housing units and vouchers,
<br />rental assistance programs, emergency housing
<br />options, and programs to increase the accessibility
<br />of homeownership, especially for young families.
<br />One interviewee said “There’s not enough housing,
<br />especially low-income, affordable housing. And so
<br />all our young adults are moving away, because they
<br />can’t find housing, and sometimes their families
<br />are following them, and that’s a real blow to the
<br />community.” Some focus group participants in
<br />Pleasanton expressed frustration at the lack of low-
<br />income housing, asking why Pleasanton was allowing
<br />developers to take credits instead of building low-
<br />income or affordable housing.viii
<br />Housing was frequently mentioned alongside the
<br />recognition of the high (and rising) cost of living in
<br />the Tri-Valley and an acknowledgement that salaries
<br />have not risen as quickly as the cost of living, which
<br />has resulted in a high housing burden (i.e., over 50%
<br />of income going toward housing expenditures). High
<br />housing costs were also mentioned by nonprofits,
<br />as high rents inherently stretch their budgets and
<br />result in their inability to sustain rental subsidies or
<br />provide emergency housing funds in the long-term.
<br />Increasingly, nonprofit organizations have supported
<br />those who are unhoused or financially challenged to
<br />move to more affordable regions.
<br />Housing concerns were particularly salient for many
<br />participants as, at the time of data collection, the
<br />COVID-19 eviction moratorium was concluding. Many
<br />service providers also noted that the pandemic had
<br />exacerbated housing problems, with many residents
<br />falling behind on rent due. Community members
<br />expressed frustration with this, as well as fear as
<br />to how they might be directly affected and what
<br />might be done to mitigate housing instability. Some
<br />discussed the possibility of building more affordable
<br />housing, while acknowledging the challenges of
<br />NIMBYism.ix
<br />Housing concerns not only affect those directly
<br />affected, but also those who serve them in other
<br />capacities. Services are stretched thin, and those
<br />working directly with clients expressed a distinct
<br />sense of frustration about their inability to meet
<br />community needs, which has a long-term negative
<br />impact on the workforce. One nonprofit staff
<br />member said:
<br />“I think it’s always been the case that there’s never
<br />been enough resources to meet the need. I think
<br />we are all seeing unparalleled demand, particularly
<br />for housing and shelter the last few years. Folks in
<br />extremely stressful, challenging, horrible situations,
<br />with just not nearly enough available resources or
<br />resources that even exist to connect them to, and
<br />then for all of us working in these organizations on
<br />the frontlines…taking these calls and not being able
<br />to successfully say, ‘Oh, yes, there is an emergency
<br />shelter bed we can put you into.’ I just think it’s
<br />really exacerbated, and then it causes mental
<br />health challenges for our staff.”
<br />In addition to housing as an overarching community
<br />concern, many raised concerns about the distinct
<br />ways that certain groups or sub-populations are
<br />disproportionately affected. This included people who
<br />are currently unhoused, young families, people with
<br />disabilities, and older adults.
<br />There is recognition that being without shelter
<br />inherently destabilizes an individual across a number
<br />of areas (e.g., mental health, food security). There
<br />was acknowledgement of a need for more steps to
<br />provide intervention before an individual is unhoused
<br />to prevent structural, physical, and mental precarity.
<br />According to the 2022 Tri-Valley PIT Count, unhoused
<br />individuals are predominantly in Livermore.13 As
<br />seen in Figure 41, there was a dramatic increase in
<br />the number of unhoused individuals in Pleasanton
<br />between 2017 and 2019. The number of unhoused
<br />individuals captured by the PIT counts has been
<br />relatively stable in the other two municipalities since
<br />2017.
<br />viii This reflects the perception of those focus group participants; the City of Pleasanton Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
<br />provides options for compliance including on-site construction of affordable units, payment of an in-lieu fee, and other
<br />alternatives.
<br />ix From the acronym ‘not in my backyard,’ which refers to generalized support for affordable housing, as long as it’s elsewhere
<br />in a community.
<br />EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS Page 108 of 554
|