Measure M is our chance, right now, to bring “self-determination” back into Santa Cruz politics. The one thing that developers with big plans, investors with dollar signs in their eyes, and city officials don’t want to see is citizens empowered to think for themselves and vote for themselves.

Consider the consequences if Measure M does not pass — out-of-control development in neighborhoods and downtown, with no citizen input; an ever-decreasing proportion of affordable units compared to expensive market-rate units, that create an unequitable and unstable society, and increased homelessness.

The “No” on M campaign’s frenzy to spin Measure M as a roadblock to building affordable housing belies their lack of substantive argument against Measure M.

To refute the “No” on M groups assertions of catastrophe if Measure M passes, I assure you it is not possible for Measure M to decertified the city’s Housing Element (H.E.) and trigger the dreaded “builders remedy.” The identification of 5,500 to 8,400 locations for new housing units (on which our H.E. is based [and certified]), were identified under existing zoning heights. That document shows that we can build all our required state housing for the next 8 years and beyond within current zoning heights. The loss of unbuilt extra floors of housing, will not reduce the real number of locations for housing identified in the H.E.

Measure M will increase the number of affordable units that developers must build in large projects, by a very modest 5%, which in this ceaselessly red-hot real-estate market, will not “stop all building in the City of Santa Cruz.” Measure M will definitely not reduce affordable housing construction. No one would vote to do that, which shows that the “No” on M group is making a false claim.

They are hoping city voters will vote “No” — which is against their own interest. The developers who want to build high-price, “market rate” developments don’t want to have to get community buy-in for taller buildings. And they don’t want affordable housing to get a bigger share. That is why they are opposing Measure M, not because they want to preserve affordable housing opportunities. Your Yes vote on Measure M gives our community the right to vote on increased height — and increases the amount of affordable housing that big developers have to produce to get approval for their high-price developments. Don’t be fooled!

In order to portray the 5% increase of affordable units required by Measure M as infeasible and detrimental, the City Council spent $42,000 of our tax money for a fancy consultant report that claims development won’t pencil out, that city voters shouldn’t have the last word on the issue of height, and that bad things will happen if they claim that right. Don’t be fooled! What the Council’s study demonstrates is that the Council is trying to block citizen empowerment, so the Council can continue to do the bidding of the big developers. Vote Yes to empower us all with the right to vote on height!

If you are tempted to believe that report, please watch this video of City Council Member Sandy Brown revealing [at the end of the January 25, 2024, City Council meeting], the [padded] cost assumptions and unverifiable developer assertions on which the report is based, and why she believes the findings are untrue.

The “No” on M group is heavily funded by big out of town developers, investors, and contractors, who want to ensure that local citizens have no power to effectively object to or slow their plans to build massive rectangular high-rises, that leave us with a less sun and a less livable city, while funneling money out of the local economy and into their far-reaching pockets.

Vote Yes on M by March 5th.

• Secure your future right to vote on zoning height increases in neighborhoods and downtown.

• Increase the number of affordable units developers have to build in large projects.

Susan Monheit is a retired State Water Regulator and Environmental Scientist.