Housing

AB 745 (Levin) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 21, 2013

AB 745, by Assembly Member Marc Levine, would authorize a city or county to request the appropriate council of governments to adjust a density to be deemed appropriate if it is inconsistent with the city’s or county’s existing density. Under current law, the housing element must include analysis of identified sites which must demonstrate density standards to accommodate a jurisdiction’s regional need for all income levels, including lower-income households. That law requires a city or county to either provide a prescribed analysis demonstrating how the adopted densities accommodate this need, or deem certain densities appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households. 

AB 745 was set for hearing before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on April 17 but was pulled from the agenda at the request of the author. The measure has not been rescheduled for a hearing at this time. 

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 set for hearing before the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on April 17 but was postponed by the Committee for a future hearing. 

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 is set for hearing before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on April 24. 

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 is set for hearing before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on April 23.

SB 550 (Jackson) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 22, 2013

SB 550, by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, would create the Accessible Multifamily Housing Act of 2013, which would require new and substantially rehabilitated assisted multifamily housing projects, for which building permits are issued on and after July 1, 2014, to be designed and constructed to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with mobility, vision, and hearing impairments

SB 550 is set for hearing before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee on April 30.

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:

• Provide an automatic extension of 24-months to maps that are 12 years or younger at the effective date of the extension; and
• 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 was passed out of the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on April 17 by a unanimous vote. While there was strong support for the objectives of the bill, the Chair and other members urged the Author to work with CSAC, the League of California Cities, and the American Planning Association, California Chapter to find a compromise to address very old tentative maps. 

AB 774 (Donnelly) – Support
As Introduced on February 21, 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 passed out of the Assembly Local Government Committee on April 17 by a vote of 6 to 2. The measure now awaits a hearing in the Assembly Judiciary Committee. 

SB 184 (Senate Governance and Finance Committee) – Support
As Amended on April 9, 2013

SB 184, the Senate Governance and Finance Committee Local Government Omnibus, would, among other things, provide technical clarification to the definition of a “city” in the statutes governing Infrastructure Financing Districts (IFDs). 

Specifically, the statutes governing IFDs only use the term “city” because “city” is defined, for the purposes of the IFD statutes, as including a city, county, and city and county. The definition of a “city” that incorporates a county is factually inaccurate and the exclusive use of the term “city” throughout the IFD statutes may mislead some readers into thinking that counties are not authorized to use IFDs. SB 184 would remove counties from the definition of a “city” and insert the term “county” throughout the statutes governing IFDs.

SB 184 was passed out of the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on April 17 by a unanimous vote. The measure now awaits a hearing in the Senate Appropriations Committee. 

SB 31 (Padilla) – Request for Comment
As Amended on April 1, 2013

SB 31, by Senator Alex Padilla, would provide local control and establish statewide guidelines for on-premise advertising displays at professional sports facilities. Specifically, the bill would amend the Outdoor Advertising Act (OAA) to clarify that the OAA does not apply to on-premise advertising displays at professional sports facility with 15,000 seats or more that is located on public land, if it is approved by a local ordinance. It would also require that on-premise advertising displays at professional sports facilities be authorized by local ordinance, which would contain restrictions for the advertising display, including the number of signs allowed, the maximum signage area, the minimum sign separation, illuminations restrictions, and hours of operation. 

SB 31 is set for hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee on April 22. 

Sacred Sites

AB 52 (Gatto) – Request for Comment
As Amended on April 8, 2013

AB 52, by Assembly Member Mike Gatto, would amend the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to specify that a project that has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal resource would be considered a project that has a significant effect on the environment. 

AB 52 was passed out of the Assembly Natural Resources Committee on April 15 by a vote of 5 to 0. The measure now awaits a hearing in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. 

Transportation

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 is set for hearing before the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 22. 

AB 612 (Nazarian) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 20, 2013

AB 612, by Assembly Member Adrin Nazarian, would require that yellow light intervals at intersections equipped with automated enforcement systems be extended by one second.

AB 612 is set for hearing before the Assembly Transportation 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 was passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 15. The measure now awaits a hearing in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.