Belinda Dinus, the principal planner, is the head of this Planning Commission (PC). The PC addressed AB 686, required by the state to commit meaningful goals for promoting fair housing. They developed maps (about 29), which they claimed went through different facets of affordable housing such as income, race, and opportunity indexes. They seemed to be a bit condescending at times, stating at one point “we know it is surprising we have low resource areas”, to which when I saw the map there was only one in the northern region of Dana Point. They say there is a low rate of applications for affordable housing such as section 8 (only 7 from 2013). The PC  also did not indicate whether they approved or denied any of these. From their presentation, it seems Lower income homes tend to be on the center part of Dana Point, but claims there is “no other trace of segregation”; this seems a bit backwards if those of low income are only in one section, while the affluent are in all areas surrounding them. They say every school's low income students fall behind, and lack of transit access and far away from major jobs, blaming it on the city's historical build as a reason for both. The previously mentioned central area is vulnerable to displacement, due to “rising prices with older multifamily housing stock”. They also claim new housing will drive up rent costs as well. The commission says that while HCD wants low income families in high resource areas, the low resource areas are “better for them” due to being closer to transit. Apparently they also did outreach, with results having needs for inclusionary, new housing, and fair housing services; in addition to help for the homeless community. When explaining this, the planning commissioner in question was not very excited to get this feedback, also saying that, “it’s due to most of them being younger that we gained this type of feedback.” Their goals seem very general, as the PC claims to want to: ensure the city has adequate vacant and underutilized sites, and continue their housing initiative program, where the city patterns with mary erickson community housing to manage their Housing Subsidy Program and evaluate feasibility for extending programs to new hotels in the area. There was no strategy described in their plan to do so however. The cities next big goal is to remove governmental constraints to housing to which SB 35 and 330 create additional streamlining. They also claim to want to create a low barrier navigation center for housing, but again lack of strategy to make this plan come into fruition. The next goal involves conserving affordable housing stock. Theur goals that can apparently fair housing is to “strengthen connection to housing prgorams and resources”, rather than implement new programs for inclusionary housing. Their desired course of action include: Continue work with the fair housing council to distribute info and materials, while also Recruit residents from low income communities and other local government bodies (again, no actual plan to do this yet).

- Council comments 

    - The council questioned house much of the potential units can actually be realites, as he is wondering if all 533 units can be potentially built

    - One of the council members suggested creating a “task force” to make more sense of the units 

        - The Planning commission responded by requesting the council to create a task force themselves (doesn't make sense to me since they aren't specialized)

            - Council motioned for a planning commission task force to get a strategy to get a high percentage of housing developed by the end of the cycle (ex. 60% in 5 years).

        - Planning commission also is trying to insinuate that they want to rather not use low income housing

    - Joseph Muller dislikes the housing plan, with his claim of “not having resources or dirt to put low to moderate income housing units”, sees it as a financial negative, believing it will depress value in housing in the cities due to lack of funding to build housing. 

        - Planning commission explains that there is still equity gained, just not as much since its meant to be affordable 

            - Mulller states it as “outright socialism or even communism”

                - The Commission does reiterate that Inclusionary isn't recommended, but an option. 

    - Mayor Federico wants to just get the plan pushed through, also said “while we have to have the plan, the state has not required us to build these units”. Very concerning. 

    - Plan was pushed through with all City Council members agreeing. 5-0.

- Public Comments 

    - John Tefoya, Buena Park from Southwest Council of Carpenters Unit, asked to council to consider creating more local hires and training rather than reaching elsewhere.