[00:00:00] Speaker A: Today on podcast by the Bay, we speak with the policy manager of the Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County, Jeremy Levine.
[00:00:09] Speaker B: It's not just one level of government or one group of people. It's every level of government doing different things that make it harder to build the housing that we really need.
[00:00:19] Speaker A: All coming up on today's episode of Podcast By the Bay. Stay tuned. It Podcast by the Bay is a production of Bay City Communications and is sponsored by Liberty Realty. Liberty Realty, serving the Peninsula and surrounding areas since 1986. For all your real estate needs, www dot liberty Realtyinvestments.com. And now another.
[00:01:11] Speaker C: Podcast by the bay. Today is Thursday, the 16 August, and I have the honor of interviewing Jeremy Levine.
Jeremy's, background? He was a graduate of high school. And, you know, I found it interesting. I kind of went on that site and I kind of looked at what the motto of the school was, and I guess you exemplify that their motto in the school is, we educate every student to excel and contribute in the global society. Welcome to Podcast by the Bay.
Jeremy is a UC Santa Barbara graduate. He's got a degree in economics and statistics.
He was also the deputy editor of the Bottom Line newspaper from 2017 2018. He was a political consultant for the California Center for Public Policy in Santa Barbara area. A legislative director for Contra Costa Young Democrats. He's also a chapter member of YIMBY. Currently, he's the policy manager for the Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County.
You know, I did a little more research on Yanni the best I could, and he's a very modest young man, Jeremy, and I know he's had a really busy schedule. I'm very pleased to have an opportunity to interview him with such brilliant young mind and energy that he's putting into his housing. One of the quotes that I noticed, he says, don't let my lack of facial hair or presence for casual clothes fool you. I bring sophistication professionalism and bad jokes to every aspect of my life. I work on improving public policy, especially housing and urban planning, policy organizing for local and regional advocacy. Welcome.
[00:03:02] Speaker B: Thank you for having me.
[00:03:05] Speaker C: It's hard to argue that housing is not a fundamental human need. Decent, affordable housing should be a basic right for everyone in this country. The reason is simple without stable shelter, everything else fails and falls apart.
So in California today, we have somewhere between three to 4 million short of housing. This has taken place for over a 30 year period. As you know, I'm a real estate broker, so I am an advocate for housing.
What we're going to talk with Jeremy today is some of his ideas on housing and how he thinks that maybe government is missing the picture or missing the idea of how we build more housing. So, Jeremy, we all know that we need housing, workforce, housing, police and fire essential workers, college housing, senior housing, low income housing, homelessness.
Tell us why you think and how we can develop a better housing policy in this state, in this county, and in this city.
[00:04:08] Speaker B: Yeah, of course. I think before trying to solve the housing crisis, it's really helpful to understand why we have a housing crisis. And it's not just one level of government or one group of people, it's every level of government doing different things that make it harder to build the housing that we really need. So I'll start big and then I'll get narrower and narrower to the things that we in San Mateo County can actually do. I think that looking at the housing crisis, there are issues like at the federal level, there is not a lot of funding for housing. There's not a lot of central drive from the federal administration to build more. There are also incentives that the federal government provides for building some kinds of housing and for buying some kinds of housing and not for occupying others.
The homeowner interest mortgage tax deduction is really impactful. Subsidy for homeowners and renters do not get the same subsidy. So it's a huge disincentive for renters to exist at all. The federal government also has policies like the liability of multifamily home builders for any defects, which just adds guaranteed legal cost and risk to any multifamily development that single family developments just don't have. I could keep going on about some of these federal incentives. I think it's just worth touching on the way that the federal government doesn't support housing and sometimes actively puts a finger on the scale for certain kinds of housing over others.
Not that any housing is good or bad, but that the way the system is designed. At the federal level, some housing is considered better. At the state level, there's a lack of coordination and also some pretty wacky tax incentives for certain kinds of housing. Again, invariably multifamily housing and apartments are disincentivized and long term single family residences are heavily incentivized.
Again, it's not that long term single family residences are bad, but it's a question of are they categorically better than rental housing that people might live in? And then at the local level, local governments have zoning regulations, restrictions on what can be built in what places, and entitlement processes that limit development and slow development down, often making it impossible to build most housing. I think that one statistic that stands out to me is 78% of the residential land in the Bay Area is zoned for exclusively single family homes. You couldn't build an apartment building, you couldn't build a corner store, you couldn't build a barber shop. If you were to operate a business out of your single family home in most of that area, you could be subject to fines. So that's just one example of a policy that makes it really hard to build the housing that is really the core to solving the shortage. So I've gone over problems. I haven't even answered your question, which is a good start. Yeah.
[00:07:37] Speaker C: Why don't we dissect a little and talk about the formula? Currently, in San Mateo County and most cities, the way that builders are able to get their approval for either expansion into their apartment complex or building condos or building townhouses is to build 15% to 20% of what they call affordable housing. And that affordable housing has to do with income. But this philosophy and I'm glad you brought it up, is not homeownership, because most of the stuff that's being built on the Peninsula today with the 15 to 20 percentage rental units.
So how do we get around that?
I may have some solutions, but I want to hear your solutions. Obviously, when a builder decides to build a project, whether it's in the city or it's in the county, they agree to build 15% to 20%. They're only going to build one bedrooms and studio apartments. And obviously, one bedrooms and studio apartments doesn't help a family and doesn't necessarily help to keep the school teacher, the police, or the fire. So how do we unravel that part of the package now so that I can kind of grab a hold of it and we'll look at San Mateo County. San Mateo County has 60% of their senior citizens own their own homes, so they're not moving. They don't want to pay that capital gains unless they're moving out of state. So any ideas on how we can get homeownership happening? And obviously, the developer and you brought up two good points the developer is going to build a one bedroom and studio apartment only because it's cheaper, and he or she's got to worry about their profit. And you can't blame them for that. So I just threw something at you. What's your idea? How do you think we can unravel that a little bit?
[00:09:42] Speaker B: Of course, it's another question that I want to come back to and zoom out, because before you even get to the inclusionary zoning requirements, that requirement that developers build 15 or 20% of new multifamily units, to be affordable, you have to look at the environment in which these developers are operating. Most cities in San Mateo have a maximum density limit of 40 or 50 dwelling units per acre. That's a mid rise apartment.
And on top of having that density limit, they have parking requirements and setback requirements and minimum lot sizes. And so before you get to building an inclusionary zoning requirement, the vast majority of locations in San Mateo County, even in downtowns, even in neighborhoods right next to Cal train stations, do not allow very dense housing. So it's hard to get very much affordable housing out of inclusionary zoning when you can only get 15 or 20% of 40 or 50 dwelling units per acre. It's a lot less than you could get if developers were able to build at a higher density in some place. It's not just density. It's like the time once you bring a project to a city, the time in which it takes to get approved can be unpredictable. And unless you use really rigorous state.
[00:11:09] Speaker C: Requirements just for a moment, let's extract the density thing. The current legislation that they pass have given most cities, and not all cities, the ability to, if they build more affordable housing, a bigger amount of density housing. But let's distinguish between that type of housing because I think we talked on it. That's still the kind of housing that we're seeing. It's not homeownership, and that's why it's still not homeownership.
[00:11:40] Speaker B: But I'm not saying about how to solve the homeownership crisis. I'm talking about how to solve the shortage of housing available to meet the need rental or homeownership. And part of why I'm not directly responding to the homeownership question is because when we talk about solving the housing crisis, I don't see that we just have a shortage of ownership opportunities. We do have a shortage of ownership opportunities. We also have a shortage of rental opportunities. We have a shortage of temporary living situations where people can come to an area and learn about what it's like and decide to move there. We have a shortage of every type of housing to meet what people want. And we have really strict regulations that are preventing every type of housing from getting built. So I'm less concerned about how do we increase the ratio of ownership housing specifically as much as how do we increase the quantity of housing that is being built, which I think will enable more ownership opportunities almost intrinsically. Because if you build a lot of really desirable rental options, then the opportunities for people to downsize move out of their expensive homes without having to worry as much about things like capital gains and property tax transfers can increase a lot. Because there will be viable rental alternatives for people that want to move from the permanence of a single family home into a retirement home or smaller apartment while they're moving jobs, or a bigger home as their family grows.
[00:13:27] Speaker C: Why don't we extract yeah, please interrogate it. Right. Why don't we extract? The problem, I think in the state has been going on for some 30 plus years. It could even be 40 years, for that matter.
In most cities in the Bay Area, our police and our fire and our essential workers don't live in the Bay Area. They live outside of it because they can't afford it. So I appreciate your thought process, but one thing that's kind of puzzling to me and my producer here is that we don't have enough information data, meaning we don't know how much housing we need for senior citizens or school teachers, low to low income senior housing.
What we're extracting now is the states coming down and say we just need housing. We need three to $4,000,000.03 to 4 million housing accommodations, and we don't know.
We're throwing the paint on the canvas. And the only way that we're seeming to solve the problem is building one bedrooms and studios like Jackson, I appreciate your positive thinking on the expansion, people moving up, so I'm trying to pick your brain, so to speak.
I know that recently, and of course, I've talked about it, san Mateo County identified in the state 92 properties that are either in unincorporated areas or they're in cities that are owned by the state of California. Most of those properties are in the quarter transportation areas. What do you think? Do you think those would be good areas to build workforce housing?
[00:15:11] Speaker B: I think they could be. You'd ask the question about studios and one bedroom solving the housing crisis, and I'd respond that San Mateo County is getting the type of housing that it allows. So San Mateo, again, because of the zoning rules, because of the lengthy entitlement processes, because of these local regulations that cities and the county can control, there are really strong incentives to build big five over one apartment buildings. You can't really build anything taller than that in most places, but you can build up to five over one. And most of those are going to be studio through two bedrooms. And the affordable units especially will be smaller. But you legally can't build a Duplex or a fourplex or like a ten unit mid rise in almost all of the county. It's banned.
[00:16:06] Speaker C: I have to challenge you on that.
[00:16:08] Speaker B: Because that's not well, SB Nine again, state rules have changed the way it works.
[00:16:14] Speaker C: Why don't we talk about what the state rules are? A single family owner in the state of California can build an.
[00:16:25] Speaker B: You in most cities. The state has theoretically allowed any single family homeowner to build a Duplex, an.
[00:16:33] Speaker C: Adu, and a junior Adu. It's a state law.
[00:16:36] Speaker B: I'm saying the state law theoretically allows that. But within the state law, cities are allowed to they have a ton of flexibility to apply certain design standards.
[00:16:46] Speaker C: Well, it was regulated, so why don't we cut to the chase on that? So what had happened is you're absolutely correct. They could have, before what, the state came in and made a law that said specifically, you cannot make your requirements so restrictive that you cannot be able to build a secondary or an attached unit. So what they want to do is encouraging. But what I was extracting there let's go back to the immediate question.
And the housing is a crisis in the state of California, but also transportation. So what I was trying to lead you into the step there is, don't you think the locations of the 92 properties that we should put a little more pressure on our state and county to go ahead and build affordable housing or workforce housing?
[00:17:34] Speaker B: So, yes, we should be leveraging that pressure to respond directly. Transit corridors are good places to be putting and allowing new housing.
My answer about you only get the housing that you allow partly responds to that.
A lot of those sites are not zoned for housing that is at the densities we're talking about, they're not zoned.
And the entitlement processes of the cities are so restrictive and time consuming that even if the sites were zoned, it would be an uncertainty if anything could actually be built on them because the local regulations, even with the state legislation coming down and tightening them basically universally in cities in San Mateo County, remain relatively strict. And so the limits to building housing on county and state owned land limit the opportunities for that and really disincentivize the state or the federal government or the county from really considering.
[00:18:43] Speaker C: So it's fair to say so far that you're in support of density housing, less restrictions in being able to build more units on a piece of property.
[00:18:54] Speaker B: I think, again, that is what local governments can do because they control those land use regulations in order to make it possible to build more types of housing. That is a precursor to increasing homeownership opportunities. But for example, to go back to one of your earlier questions, a lot of the barriers that prevent the new housing, that's especially new multifamily housing, from being built are federal barriers. For example, the defect liability risk that condo builders face.
[00:19:31] Speaker C: Well, let's go extract that because you're kind of not giving accurate information.
[00:19:37] Speaker B: Please correct me. Yeah, help me understand.
[00:19:38] Speaker C: And only because I'm a real estate.
[00:19:40] Speaker B: Yeah, that's a discussion.
[00:19:41] Speaker C: Okay. California has a strict law, and you're very accurate in the respect. They would rather build an apartment building than they would build condos because we have in the state law a ten year contractor's remedy, which means that they need to guarantee the thank you.
[00:19:56] Speaker B: Thank you for clarifying.
[00:19:57] Speaker C: Yeah, I need to clarify. It's not a federal law.
[00:19:59] Speaker B: I appreciate that. Thank you.
[00:20:00] Speaker C: So with that said, and I'm glad because you kind of extracted that question earlier on. That is one of the major reasons why developers are not and then maybe later on they will convert them. What's your thought process? Do you think the law should be changed a little bit? Because right now with that ten year policy, a lot of people, developers or investors, are going to want to build apartments and they're not going to want to build condos or townhouses for homeownership. Do you think we should look at that law?
[00:20:32] Speaker B: Absolutely. I think that the defect law is one of the main reasons that condos are so much harder to build than apartments, even though they are often essentially same buildings, but it's just an extra cost that is added uniquely to condos. The reason I've been kind of finagling around some of your questions is because your questions seem really oriented toward how can we increase homeownership opportunities? And I think increasing homeownership opportunities is a good goal.
I don't think that we have a homeownership crisis. I think we have a housing crisis, which is about the cost of homeownership and renting.
I'm equally.
[00:21:22] Speaker C: I appreciate your comment. I'm only reflecting on some of the comments that I hear from a lot of people of all different age categories. Obviously, we happen to be in the Silicon Valley area. There's the divide down here in the Bay Area where some of the people that work for Tesla or work for Google or Facebook or startup, and I come across these people make some two and three and 400,000 a year. So the economic divide is quite large in the Bay Area. And that's why even some of those people are renting. They don't have the money for a down payment.
[00:21:58] Speaker B: Yeah, I have a friend who they're a couple, and one of them works at Apple, and one of them is a PhD biotech researcher. And they can't buy here, and they're not living in an expensive rental. They're not party animals or something. They're responsible, financially conservative, and they're so obvious. Still can't afford to live in a community or a house that meets their needs.
[00:22:27] Speaker C: Okay. COVID has brought us a lot of changes in housing. I want to kind of express a little bit too. As you know, in the Bay Area, they're saying some over 40% or 45% are still working at home. Okay. With that advent, what we have right now in some areas, and I'll use Foster City and parts of San Mateo, they have commercial buildings that are vacant. They're absolutely vacant, and those are high rise.
In Foster City, we have one or two visa buildings that are completely vacant. And they've been that way during COVID and before COVID What's your thought process? What we're seeing now in the real estate industry, everybody's rezoning their commercial buildings to bioscience. Now, bioscience uses more water, less parking. Do you think that we could help solve some of our housing crisis by retooling those buildings into something?
[00:23:29] Speaker B: It can be part of the solution, but it is really expensive to retrofit commercial development, to be residential development. And compared to the cost of new construction, it's often just as expensive or more expensive. And I would ask, why is it fine to have an old ten story office building get retrofitted, but not to build a new ten story apartment building nearby? And I think that, again, we should be making it easier to retrofit. We should be doing what we can to encourage retrofitting in vacant office space.
I think it's a false flag to say that retrofitting converting office to residential can solve the housing crisis. Well, I think it's a really good start.
Piece of the puzzle.
[00:24:22] Speaker C: Maybe I didn't ask the question right. I'm not suggesting that we convert the whole thing to residential, but much more a mixed use situation, a community where you could have a retail, you could have a bike shop, you could have a coffee shop, you could have a small chiropractor. So more of sense of bringing the community back?
[00:24:41] Speaker B: Yeah, I think you asked the question. Well, there are opportunities to do that kind of retrofitting. Again, it often is just as expensive or more expensive than building the kind of community you just described from scratch.
[00:25:00] Speaker C: Well, actually I appreciate that thing. Actually, the Northern Carpenters Training Center, I went through it recently and they are starting to work across the country and especially in California looking exactly at what you're saying it is expensive. But you know what? The problem we have is no land. So you brought up the point earlier and I think density all of our cities right now and I'm just going to use Foster City we have to comply with rena numbers. We have almost 1900 that we have to do.
And in Foster City we have probably in the last 15 years only built two brand new houses. We built some condos, we built some townhouses.
The only density that we're seeing in most of the cities coming up and down the peninsula, even some of the ones on El Camino, is that they're just adding more one bedrooms and studio apartments trying to say that they're solving the houses cris. So don't you think it's important if we don't believe in home ownership, that is the key to solving the problem that we need to understand the data or the information? Is this a single parent? Is this a married couple? Is this a senior citizen? In other words, if we're going to build the appropriate housing, don't we need to know the audience? What I'm interested in is a vibrant society. In order to have a vibrant community, everybody is concerned about their schools, their police, their fire, their essential workers, their ambulance drivers. So I'm really kind of hoping that you'll pioneer with getting the word out that we really need to know the data. We can't continue to throw the paint on the canvas and expect it to stick. What's your so does it make any sense?
[00:27:03] Speaker B: I would say that there's a lot of data as part of this process. You just described the housing element process where cities all over California and right now in the Bay Area are updating these housing plans. They're required to go study the housing needs. Literally there's a whole in Foster Cities housing element, a 50 page section about housing needs and then another section about the constraints to meeting those needs and then an affirmatively furthering fair housing section. And the data in these sections is often incomplete, it's often faulty and it doesn't cover everything that we need.
[00:27:39] Speaker C: Jeremy, I have to correct you because you're right that they have a formula, but the formula only has to do with the growth of your population.
It distinguishes people on income, low to low income. It doesn't come out and say, well, in one city they need more senior housing or two, they need workforce.
[00:28:02] Speaker B: But the data does include data on age of the community, the racial composition, the composition of people who are cost burdened, the household side.
[00:28:14] Speaker C: It does in a general way.
[00:28:16] Speaker B: So that's what I'm saying is the data doesn't say we have 100 seniors, we need 100 units of senior housing. It doesn't do that. You're right. But it does say, here are how many seniors we have, and here's how many of them are cost burdened or overcrowded. And it says, look at cost burdening and overcrowding by race, look at them by age, look at them by gender.
It does have a lot of data that can guide the policy making process if cities choose to respond to the data.
So, again, it's not perfect data, but I'm just trying to make the case. There is some data, and as part of the housing element process, cities are supposed to present it and actually respond to it. I have seen a lot of cities on the peninsula not respond to all of the data that is in their housing elements. So housing elements that will identify we have a shortage of senior housing and then no plan to deliver senior housing or housing elements. That like the county housing element.
[00:29:22] Speaker C: For example, right now in San Mateo County, unfortunately, first of all, I admire the state doing this.
They're overburdened. We only have three cities, or maybe four in San Mateo County that their housing element have been approved.
[00:29:37] Speaker B: I thought we only had two.
[00:29:39] Speaker C: But our housing element in Foster City hasn't been approved. Now, one of the burdens is that they're overburdened with too many cities, not enough staff for them.
Well, it's not just the cities, it's the state. The state right now is in dire need. So this kind of brings in another discussion here, because even the cost of housing has gone up so much. And because of the cost of housing, even your carpenters and your plumbers cannot afford to live in the Bay Area. So what's your philosophy on rent control?
[00:30:18] Speaker B: When designed well, rent control can help reduce displacement without having huge negative impacts on housing production. When designed poorly, rent control can help incumbent residents by meaning that the residents that are currently living there don't face rent increases, but it can stifle new housing development at the expense of prospective residents.
[00:30:50] Speaker C: Can you give an example of an area where rent control in your mind worked?
[00:30:55] Speaker B: So I'll give an example of where it didn't work, and then where it made where it had some benefits. I think the example that first made me think rent control can be a really bad policy is St. Paul in Minnesota instituted rent control, and Minneapolis, the other twin city, did not. So that provided a really cool natural study to look at what happens when you institute rent control. And the big data point worth noting in St. Paul is that they did not exempt new construction from the rent control. So rent control applied to all buildings.
I think that you can look at the development of housing over time, and in Minneapolis it just keeps going up after St. Paul passed rent control, and in St. Paul, it just collapsed because new developers did not want to build housing when they knew that they would not be able to charge a market rent for it.
I think that other policies elsewhere, like Oakland, might be a city that has instituted different rent limitations.
It has stabilized the market and it hasn't at least obviously caused new housing construction to crater.
[00:32:22] Speaker C: Okay, we're here in limited time.
[00:32:26] Speaker B: I'm long winded.
[00:32:27] Speaker C: No problem. I wanted to talk about San Mateo County's grand Jury recent case where they came out and basically told Portola Valley, Woodside, Atherton and Hillsborough that they didn't feel that they could adequately build 80 units. And basically the grand jury's thing is they were saying you don't have accountability for making sure that you would be renting to lower income or moderate income people.
[00:33:03] Speaker B: So what's your thoughts on been? HLC and Partners had been telling those cities exactly what the grand jury report found for about a year before the grand jury report came out that ADUs are an important part of solving the housing crisis, but it's not reliable to say that they are going to be rented at low income rates. Just look on Zillow and you can see ADUs for rent in Hillsborough and Woodside, that they're not being rented at low income rates on the open market and that cities, if they wanted to be able to count ADUs, toward the affordable housing portion of their regional housing needs. Allocation that in order to do that, cities needed to implement tracking programs like a rental registry that would help them actually verify that ADUs are being rented on the open market at an affordable rate.
So I thought the grand jury report was a helpful piece of information to help guide those cities toward planning for housing in a more meaningful way.
[00:34:14] Speaker C: Do you think that it's achievable? From what I understand, the state and the cities are trying to figure out something on how to solve that. So maybe there will come out a solution to that.
[00:34:25] Speaker B: I think a solution can come out of it. I will say I don't know about the last draft, but in its initial draft of the housing element, woodside, Hillsborough, Atherton, they all claimed somewhere between 80 and 120 ADUs would be affordable and rented on the open market to very low income tenants. Meaning that you'd be renting that adu brand new, nice adu in Atherton for less than like one $400 to a family.
And I don't think there is anything that those jurisdictions can do to justify that assumption.
There's no way that a hundred very low income units are going to be built in Atherton, unless Atherton, I shouldn't. Say, no way. There is a way, but they would need to make the permitting really easy. They'd have to make it really accessible to build maybe more than one adu, even per lot. And there'd need to be public subsidy.
[00:35:29] Speaker C: Do you currently rent?
[00:35:30] Speaker B: I do rent.
[00:35:31] Speaker C: Okay.
What city do you rent in?
[00:35:33] Speaker B: I rent in Oakland.
[00:35:34] Speaker C: Okay.
[00:35:35] Speaker B: I've been priced out of San Mateo. I wanted to move here, but I $1,900 a month for a 700 square foot apartment in a five over one.
[00:35:47] Speaker C: Okay, well, congratulations on that. Would you like to have home ownership eventually?
[00:35:51] Speaker B: I would like to have condom ownership eventually. I think I'd like to own a fourplex or an eight plex, some middle density thing where I could live on site and rent and be a part of a community that way.
[00:36:06] Speaker C: Jeremy, so we can get a little interest. Jeremy, I did a little more research on you, but I would like you to share to the audience. What do you do when you're off hours? Often you're quite enthusiastic about what your passion is. Your passion is public policy. I'm glad to see you weren't going to become a lawyer.
[00:36:24] Speaker B: No, I work with plenty of lawyers, and I love working with them, and I wouldn't want to be them.
[00:36:32] Speaker C: Tell us a little bit about some of your Hobies. I know I read something about mushrooms. Can you explain.
[00:36:41] Speaker B: Up? I grew up in Lafayette, East Bay suburb that has a lot of open space, much like a lot of San Mateo County. And so I grew up spending a lot of time outdoors.
As I got older, I got really into biking around. It wasn't really safe to bike in Lafayette because the infrastructure is not designed for bikes, it's designed for cars. But I enjoy outdoor activities, and I also enjoy taking public transit to new cities and exploring the Bay Area.
The mushrooms that you might have heard about is a hobby from the past few years. I greatly enjoy mushroom hunting, I call it in the hills of the Bay Area. There are some of the best mycological diversity in some of the East Bay and San Mateo hills, actually. And so it's a great place to just explore, find new kinds of fungal life. Hard to say why I'm so drawn to the hobby because I don't even eat most of what I find. You're not allowed to forage for eating in most of the parks out just love it's like bird watching. Sometimes you just have to love the hunt.
[00:38:01] Speaker C: Well, on behalf of podcast by the Bay, Jeremy Levine, I want to thank you for taking the time and your passion and your energy. I hope to continue on with also having another interview with you and maybe a panelist discussion on housing. We try to condense it in a short period of time. I appreciate your time, your energy. Continue the fight for housing. It's worth it.
[00:38:22] Speaker B: Thank you patrick.
[00:38:22] Speaker C: Thank you.
[00:38:23] Speaker B: Leadership of Foster City.
[00:38:38] Speaker A: Thanks for listening to this episode of Podcast By the Bay. You can contact us by email at
[email protected]. Podcast by the Bay is a production of Bay City Communications and is sponsored by Liberty Realty. Liberty Realty serving the Peninsula and surrounding areas since 1986 for all your real estate needs. Www.libertyrealtyinvestments.com all material and content is property of Podcast By the Bay, but does not necessarily reflect the views of Podcast By the Bay. You can follow us on Twitter at Podcast By the Bay as our handle, or on Facebook, facebook.com slash podcastbythebay. And remember, you can listen to any of our episodes anytime on any Podcast site. Until next time, stay tuned.
