Housing

AB 1229 (Atkins) – Support
As Introduced on February 22, 2013

AB 1229, by Assembly Member Toni Atkins, would restore an essential tool to counties for planning and providing their fair share of the housing need for lower-income residents in the state. Specifically, the measure restores a county’s ability to establish inclusionary zoning programs.

Counties have always had the authority to adopt local inclusionary housing ordinances. However, in a 2009 appellate court decision, Palmer/Sixth Street Properties L.P. v. City of Los Angeles, 175 Cal. App. 4th 1396 (2009), the courts took a very broad interpretation of the Costa-Hawkins Act and its application on inclusionary housing ordinances, eliminating a city or county’s authority to require inclusionary housing. Costa-Hawkins was intended to restrict systems of rent control, not preclude rent restrictions on inclusionary housing. 

The state is still facing a shortage of decent rental housing affordable to low-income Californians. It is critical that counties be able to establish proactive programs to help provide safe, clean, and affordable housing statewide to meet the critical demand. 

AB 1229 is set for hearing before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on May 1. 

AB 325 (Alejo) – Oppose
As Introduced on February 13, 2013

AB 325, by Assembly Member Luis Alejo, would expand, from one to over four years, the statute of limitations to sue a county or city, challenging the adoption of a housing element or a number of related local ordinances. 

CSAC opposed previous efforts to expand the statute of limitations as it leaves local agencies, business, and developers unfairly open to uncertainty long after decisions have been made. Working with the American Planning Association, Rural County Representatives of California, and the League of California Cities, we have offered amendments that would provide an additional alternative to challenge the adequacy of a housing element rather than open local agencies up to litigation for an unreasonable period of time. It is unclear at this time whether the author and sponsors will accept our suggested compromise. 

AB 325 is set for hearing before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on May 1.

SB 391 (DeSaulnier) – Request for Comment
As Amended on April 2, 2013

SB 391, by Senator Mark DeSaulnier, would enact the California Homes and Jobs Act of 2013. The bill would impose a fee, except in certain specific instances, of $75 to be paid at the time of the recording of every real estate instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded. The measure would require that revenues from this fee be sent quarterly to the Department of Housing and Community Development for deposit in the newly created California Homes and Jobs Trust Fund. The bill would provide that moneys in the fund may be expended to support affordable housing, administering housing programs, and the cost of periodic audits.

SB 391 was passed out of the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on April 24 by a vote of 5 to 2. The measure now awaits a hearing in the Senate Appropriations Committee. 

SB 510 (Jackson) – Support
As Introduced on February 21, 2013

SB 510, by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, would clarify existing law governing the conversion of mobile home parks from rental to resident owned. Specifically, the measure would require local agencies to consider the results of surveys of mobile home park residents when deciding to approve, conditionally approve, or disprove a subdivision. Further, it gives counties and cities the authority to disprove a subdivision if at least a majority of the park’s residents do not support the conversion indicated through the survey. 

Mobile homes are an important source of affordable housing in California – with approximately 5,000 parks statewide. Many local jurisdictions impose rent controls to ensure mobile homes remain affordable to those on fixed-incomes, such as seniors and working families. The state is still facing a shortage of decent housing affordable to low-income Californians and this measure would provide that mobile home residents have a voice in conversion proposals as well as clarifying the powers of local agencies in the subdivision process. 

SB 510 was passed out of the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on April 23 by a vote of 7 to 3.

Land Use

AB 116 (Bocanegra) – Support if Amended
As Amended on March 20, 2013

AB 116, by Assembly Member Raul Bocanegra, would extend, by 24-months, the expiration date of any approved tentative map or vesting tentative map that has not expired as of the effective date of the Subdivision Map Act and will expire prior to January 1, 2016. 

CSAC does support the 24-month map extensions for more recently approved maps. However, if AB 116 were signed into law as currently in print, it would enact the eighth automatic map extension since 1990. As a result, some unexpired tentative maps may be upwards of 18 years old. Another two year extension on such old maps could prevent local governments from meeting goals and priorities established after original map approval, as well as comply with many new mandates that local agencies must now consider in approving a map. In addition to multiple housing element updates, local governments are dealing with new requirements as a result of the passage of AB 32 and SB 375 to address climate change impacts and move towards the development of more compact, sustainable communities, all of which impact local land use decisions. 

Again, CSAC supports another automatic 24-month extension for newer maps, but respectfully requests the following amendments to address our concerns with older maps:
1. Provide an automatic extension of 24-months to maps that are 12 years or younger at the effective date of the extension; and
2. Provide an extension at the discretion of the county or city for maps that are 12 years or older at the effective date of the extension, with tolling for those applications with maps that have been under litigation.

We believe these amendments strike a balance that allows development projects to continue to move forward as the housing market and overall economy recover yet provides for necessary local agency review of old maps to ensure they are consistent with current local planning documents. 

AB 116 is set for hearing before the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 1.

AB 162 (Holden) – Concerns
As Amended on April 23, 2013

AB 162, by Assembly Member Chris Holden, would require local agencies to grant ministerial approval for telecommunication facilities modification requests within 90 days, define the term “substantially change,” and prevent local municipalities from requiring proof of gap in coverage.

While the 90 days provided in the bill as amended is twice as much time as provided for in the introduced version of the measure, CSAC still remains concerned that the time limitation will be challenging for California’s counties considering limited staffing capacity, Brown Act requirements, compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and state and federal laws that further impact the time it takes to receive, process, analyze and approve land use applications. 

CSAC also has concerns with the definition of “substantially change.” We believe AB 162 stretches beyond a reasonable modification request by providing an alternative approval process for potentially much larger projects that could circumvent local land use ordinances and zoning regulations around height limits, dimensional limits, stealth design, prohibition of changes that would require Federal Aviation Administration lighting, and various other municipal ordinances and zoning regulations that protect the health and public safety in our local communities.

Lastly, we have concerns with the prohibition of local government’s ability to require proof of gap in coverage. Local governments generally require proof of gap in coverage to justify modifications to a facility, as requested by the carrier. Absent this information, counties would have difficulty determining if a modification is necessary to satisfy the coverage area. 

AB 162 is set for hearing before the Assembly Local Government Committee on May 1. 

SB 684 (Hill) – Support
As Amended on April 1, 2013

SB 684, by Senator Jerry Hill, would authorize the extension, preservation and retention of existing redevelopment signs with approval of the county or city. The bill does not authorize new signage nor are the existing signs under this proposal billboards. 

This measure is necessary in light of the elimination of redevelopment agencies and the unintended consequence that existing sign agreements cannot be extended because there is no longer a redevelopment agency to authorize the extension. Before the elimination of redevelopment agencies, these signs were exempt from the Outdoor Advertising Act. Signage agreements needed authorization from the redevelopment agency and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). SB 684 simple clarifies that existing redevelopment signs can be extended with approval of a county or city, in place of the redevelopment agency, and Caltrans. 

SB 684 is set for hearing before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on April 30.

Public Works Administration

AB 195 (Hall) – Co-Sponsor
As Introduced on January 28, 2013

AB 195, by Assembly Member Isadore Hall, would extend the sunset date on existing design-build authority granted to counties until July 1, 2020.

The design-build method is an approach to delivering public works projects which counties find beneficial. Under design-build, the owner contracts with a single entity to both design and construct a project at a fixed price. The owner prepares documents that describe the concept of the project and the desired outcome for the project. In addition to price, proposals are generally evaluated on criteria such as best-value, qualifications and design quality. There are a number of advantages to using design-build, when compared to the traditional design-bid-build method:

Projects can be completed faster, as construction can commence during the design phase;
Contractors are provided with more flexibility over project design, materials and construction methods. This promotes project design and construction innovation, which can ultimately result in higher quality, as well as cost savings; and
Time-consuming and costly disputes between designer and contractor are reduced, because both parties are affiliated with the same entity.

Approximately nine counties have used the design-build method for project delivery for a variety of projects ranging from parking facilities to parks and recreation projects to fire stations. Counties and tax payers in general, benefit from the use of design-build authority due to cost savings produced by this method of project delivery. Furthermore, given the continued difficult economic times across the State, local agencies need maximum flexibility to delivery projects based on their expertise in choosing the right delivery method.

AB 195 is set for hearing before the Assembly Local Government Committee on May 1. 

SB 425 (DeSaulnier) – Request for Comment
As Amended on April 18, 2013

SB 425, by Senator Mark DeSaulnier, would create the Public Works Project Peer Review Act of 2013, which would require a public agency that is principally tasked with administering the planning, development, and operation of a public works project to establish a peer review group, if 1) a project’s total development, construction, and reasonable projected maintenance costs exceeds $1 billion; 2) the Governor, or head of the administering agency has determined that establishing a peer review group is in the public’s interest; or 3) the Legislature passes a statute or resolution requiring the administering agency to establish a peer review group. 

SB 425 is set for hearing before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on May 1. 

SB 785 (Wolk) – Support
As Amended on April 23, 2013

SB 785, by Senator Lois Wolk, would recast existing design-build statutes for purposes of eliminating inconsistencies and consolidating present statutory authority as well as extend the sunset date on existing design-build authority and reduce the project cost threshold to projects that exceed $1 million. 

The design-build method is an approach to delivering public works projects which counties find beneficial. Under design-build, the owner contracts with a single entity to both design and construct a project at a fixed price. The owner prepares documents that describe the concept of the project and the desired outcome for the project. In addition to price, proposals are generally evaluated on criteria such as best-value, qualifications and design quality. By using design-build, projects can be completed faster, as construction can commence during the design phase. Contractors are provided with more flexibility over project design, materials and construction methods. This promotes project design and construction innovation, which can ultimately result in higher quality, as well as cost savings. Further, time-consuming and costly disputes between designer and contractor are reduced, because both parties are affiliated with the same entity.

Approximately nine counties have used the design-build method for project delivery for a variety of projects ranging from parking facilities to parks and recreation projects to fire stations. Counties, and tax payers in general, benefit from the use of design-build authority due to cost savings produced by this method of project delivery. Furthermore, given the continued difficult economic times across the State, local agencies need maximum flexibility to delivery projects based on their expertise in choosing the right delivery method.

SB 785 is set for hearing before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on May 1.

Transportation

AB 14 (Lowenthal) – Support
As Introduced on December 3, 2012

AB 14, by Assembly Member Bonnie Lowenthal, would require the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency (Agency) to convene a Freight Advisory Committee to assist with the development of a State Freight Plan that guides the immediate and long-range planning activities and capital investments for the movement of freight. 

AB 14 requires the Freight Advisory Committee to consist of a broad group of stakeholders including representatives of ports, shippers, carriers, freight industry associations and workforce, state departments and commissions, environmental, safety, and community organizations, and local governments. As owners and operators of a significant share of the State’s surface transportation network, which the freight industry and the people of California rely on for the movement of goods, CSAC offers our technical expertise, practical experience, and policy support to you, the Agency, and the Freight Advisory Committee in this endeavor.

With every aspect of the State’s transportation network underfunded and in need of new revenues, it is critical that the transportation community develop plans to protect and improve our existing infrastructure and employ new technologies and strategies for the most efficient and effective movement of freight and use of the transportation system. 

AB 14 is set for hearing before the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 29. 

AB 574 (Lowenthal) – Support
As Amended on April 15, 2013

AB 574, by Assembly Member Bonnie Lowenthal, would create the Sustainable Communities Infrastructure Program. The purpose of the program is to invest cap and trade auction revenues derived from fuels into transportation and sustainable communities infrastructure to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to address infrastructure needs that are critical in order to develop and support sustainable communities. 

AB 574 builds upon existing statewide strategies such as regional blueprints and SB 375 (Chapter No. 728, Statutes of 2008), which the State enacted to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector via integrated transportation, housing, and land use planning and projects at the regional and local levels. Guided by state criteria, AB 574 would use the existing regional structure to advance a competitive grant program to incentivize and foster innovation at the local level. Projects awarded funds under the program would integrate land use changes with transportation infrastructure investments to achieve cost-effective GHG emissions reductions. AB 574 provides a unique opportunity to implement existing statewide directives for the development of sustainable communities and the reduction of GHG emissions in all 58 California counties. 

AB 574 was passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 22 by a vote of 12 to 4. The measure is now set for hearing before the Assembly Natural Resources Committee on April 29. 

AB 755 (Ammiano) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 21, 2013

AB 755, by Assembly Member Tom Ammiano, would provide that the construction or reconstruction of a bridge designed for use by motor vehicles shall not be eligible for federal funds apportioned to the state, funds made available from the Highway Users Tax Account, or toll bridge funds unless the planning process for the bridge project takes into account the need for a suicide barrier.

AB 755 is set for hearing in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 1. 

SB 791 (Wyland) – Oppose
As Amended on April 4, 2013

SB 791, by Senator Mark Wyland, would require legislative approval by a two-thirds vote to adjust the fuel excise tax rate pursuant to the Transportation Tax Swap (Tax Swap). Further, the measure would require the Department of Finance to annually calculate the fuel excise tax rate rather than the Board of Equalization and report to the Legislature before March 1 of each year. 

The Tax Swap adopted by the Legislature in March 2010, and reaffirmed in March 2011, eliminated the sales tax on gasoline (Prop. 42) and replaced it with a 17.3-cent excise tax increase on gasoline, indexed annually to keep pace with what the sales tax on gasoline would have generated in a given fiscal year to ensure revenue neutrality. The annual adjustment could increase or decrease the Tax Swap excise tax rate in order to achieve this mutually agreed upon goal. The sales and excise taxes were also adjusted to provide similar results for transit funding. The Tax Swap also provided the State significant general fund relief by dedicating a portion of the Tax Swap excise tax to transportation related bond debt service. The goal of the Tax Swap was to remove transportation funding from the annual budget debate in the state and was not intended to have an impact on overall funding for transportation infrastructure. 

SB 791 is contrary to the agreement made under the Tax Swap. If the excise tax rate is not allowed to increase to keep pace with what the sales tax would have generated, investment in our transportation network will continue to be deferred. The economic consequences of this policy choice cannot be overstated. Every Californian, whether they drive a personal vehicle, carpool, take mass transit, ride their bike, or walk to work, school, and essential services, will feel the negative ramifications of a continued underinvestment in transportation. 

California’s transportation network is crumbling and in severe need of significant repair, rehabilitation, and maintenance. The 2012 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment Report found an $8.2 billion annual shortfall for maintenance and rehabilitation needs on just the local system alone. If transportation infrastructure needs continue to go unaddressed, the negative economic, environmental, and social consequences will continue to plague our great state. 

SB 791 is set for hearing before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on April 30.