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 was passed out of the Assembly Local Government Committee on May 8 by a vote of 6 to 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 now offered two different approaches to a compromise 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. We continue to try to work with the author and sponsors to forward one of our suggested compromises 

AB 325 was passed out of Assembly Local Government Committee on May 8 by a vote of 5 to 3, although many members, including former San Mateo County Supervisor Rich Gordon, expressed their concerns with the measure as drafted. These members encouraged the author to come to a compromise with CSAC and other organizations in opposition before the measure goes to the Assembly Floor. Finally, these members also reserved the right to not support the bill in the future should the author not amend the bill to remove local government opposition to the currently drafted, extremely expansive extension of the statute of limitations on the adopting of a housing element and a number of related ordinances. 

Land Use

AB 774 (Donnelly) – Support
As Amended on March 19, 2013

AB 774, by Assembly Member Tim Donnelly, would expand public safety posting requirements upon counties dissolving a county service area or zone for public streets and requires notification to property owners when revenue is insufficient to meet the costs of operating and maintaining services. 

AB 774 was set for hearing before the Assembly Judiciary Committee on May 7 but the hearing was canceled at the request of the author. The measure is now a two-year bill. 

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 simply 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 Appropriations Committee on May 13. 

Transportation

SCA 8 (Corbett) – Support 
As Introduced on December 14, 2012

SCA 8, by Senator Ellen Corbett, would reduce the vote threshold for special taxes to fund transportation projects to 55 percent, from the current two-thirds vote requirement. 

As a matter of long-standing policy, CSAC supports these measures and others that would reduce the vote threshold from the current 2/3 supermajority requirement. The measure would allow communities to self-determine the level of revenues they want. CSAC has encouraged the Legislature to consider this, and all of the other voter threshold measures, in a broad discussion about what is appropriate to be placed before the voters in 2014. That discussion should consider the needs and desires of local communities, as well as providing counties the flexibility to pursue special taxes in either the entire county or only in the unincorporated areas.

SCA 8 is set for hearing before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on May 15.