BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 679
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Norma Torres, Chair
AB 679 (Allen) - As Introduced: February 11, 2011
SUBJECT : Land use: housing element.
SUMMARY : In cases where a county is providing funding for
affordable housing construction within a city, allows a transfer
of a portion of the county's share of the regional housing need
to the city to reflect the specific affordability of the units
being funded rather than having to be proportional across all
income categories.
EXISTING LAW
1)Allows a county to transfer a portion of its share of the
regional housing need to a city or cities within the county
that agree to the transfer, but stipulates that county's share
of low- and very low-income housing can be reduced only in
proportion to the amount by which the county's share of
moderate- and above moderate-income housing is reduced
(Government Code Section 65584.07).
2)From January 1, 1997 through June 30, 2007, allowed the County
of Napa to meet up to 15 percent of its existing share of the
regional housing need for lower-income households by
committing funds for the construction of affordable housing
units within one or more cities within the county, if various
conditions were met (Government Code 65584.6).
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
Background
Under current law, counties can transfer a portion of their
share of the regional housing need to a city within the county
if the city agrees to take on the additional allocation. In
implementing such a transfer, a county's share of low- and very
low-income housing can be reduced only in proportion to the
amount by which the county's share of moderate- and above
moderate income housing is reduced. The proportionality
requirement is consistent with the overall goal of housing
AB 679
Page 2
element law to ensure that every jurisdiction plans for housing
across all income levels and serves to ensure that a county does
not pursue transfers simply as a way to remove its obligation to
plan for affordable housing.
In 1996, Napa County successfully pursued legislation (AB 3452,
V. Brown, Chapter 1018, Statues of 1996) to allow the county to
transfer a portion of its lower-income RHNA (short for regional
housing needs assessment) without having to follow the
proportionality requirement if it provided funding to ensure
that the units got built within the city that accepted the
transfer. Such transfers were limited to 15% of the county's
total share of the RHNA for lower-income households and the
statutory language include a sunset date of Jun 30, 2004. At the
time, the county argued that there were a variety of unique
circumstances in Napa County that made affordable housing
development difficult within the unincorporated area, including
a voter-approved measure designed to protect the county's
valuable agricultural land.
Napa County's special transfer authority was extended in 2000
(AB 2430), Wiggins, Chapter 358, Statutes of 2000, allowing the
county pursue non-proportional transfers through June 30, 2007.
AB 2430 also placed additional conditions on the transfers,
including that the number of units transferred could not exceed
40% of the number of lower-income units built in the
unincorporated area during the same planning period. In other
words, for every one unit transferred, the county would have to
show that 2.5 units were built in the unincorporated area. The
extension of the transfer authority expired in June, 2007.
Purpose of the Bill
Napa County's last housing element was due in June of 2009.
HCD's review of the draft element found that it was not in
compliance with the law, primarily because HCD did not believe
that the county had identified adequate sites to support the
development of affordable housing. The county had included a
number of sites in its housing element at below the default
density of 20 units per acre, and HCD did not believe the
county's analysis of those sites was enough to establish their
adequacy. The county disagrees with HCD's position and believes
that it provided all of the analysis that the law requires. The
county adopted the housing element despite HCD's finding that it
was not in compliance with the law and was subsequently sued by
Latinos Unidos, a farmworker advocacy group. That suit is
AB 679
Page 3
currently being litigated.
The county's next housing element update is due in October,
2014. Prior to that update, the county is seeking legislation
that it believes would make it easier for the county to produce
a housing element that complies with the law. AB 679 is one of
two bills that county is sponsoring to provide more flexibility.
The other, AB 542, has also been referred to this committee.
Napa County has a sizable affordable housing trust fund that is
capitalized through fees on development in the county. The
county has spent over $21 million from this trust fund since
1989, almost entirely on projects within the City of Napa. For
many of these projects, the county was not able to get "credit"
towards meeting its RHNA obligations. For example, the county
has recently providing funding for two projects within the City
of Napa with a total of 104 units of low- and very low-income
housing. However, because of the proportionality requirement,
Napa County is not able to transfer 104 units worth of its
lower-income RHNA share to the city.
Napa County is pursuing AB 679 to allow counties to transfer a
portion of their lower-income RHNA without also transferring a
portion of the RHNA at the moderate- and above moderate-income
levels, if they provide funding for the affordable units that
are transferred. They argue that this would provide an
incentive for counties to provide funding for affordable housing
within cities and would ensure that more affordable housing
actually gets built.
Housing Element Working Group
The law that allows RHNA transfers and requires them to be
proportional across income categories was passed in 2004. It
was one of many reforms to the RHNA process included in AB 2158
(Lowenthal), Chapter 696, Statutes of 2004, was one of the major
pieces of legislation that came out of the Housing Element
Working Group (HEWG). The group, which was convened by HCD in
2003, was a broad-based group that included representatives from
local government, councils of government, the for-profit and
non-profit development community, and affordable housing
advocacy groups. HCD proposed the group after several lengthy
and divisive Legislative battles over changes to housing element
law.
The HEWG met from June through November of 2003 and reached
AB 679
Page 4
consensus on reform proposals in three major areas: the
regional housing needs allocation process, increasing housing
development certainty, and the identification of adequate sites.
AB 2158 was one of the legislative vehicles for implementing
these reforms. Because the bill represented a consensus
agreement, it received broad bi-partisan support throughout the
legislative process. No "no" votes were cast against the bill.
HCD recently reconvened a new HEWG to evaluate how effective the
changes that came out of the prior HEWG have been and to examine
whether further changes to housing element law may be necessary
to achieve the goals of SB 375. The group has already met
several times and has identified a variety of issues on which to
focus its attention.
AB 679 proposes changes to what was a carefully crafted
compromise around RHNA transfers. Given that the HEWG is
currently meeting and there is no rush to make statutory changes
(Napa County's next housing element update is not due until
October of 2015), the Committee may wish to consider asking the
county to first take this issue to the working group before
pursuing legislation. The HEWG was able to reach consensus on
the issue of RHNA transfers in the past, and it may be worth
seeing of its members can reach consensus on changes to the
transfer process before pursuing legislation.
Arguments in Support
Napa County argues that AB 679 creates incentives for counties
to fund low-income housing in the location that is most
beneficial to the persons who will occupy them. The county
notes that this flexibility will also stimulate local job growth
as it will increase the number of units being built.
Arguments in Opposition
Opponents, including the California Rural Legal Assistance
Foundation and the Western Center on Law and Poverty, argue that
AB 679 would undo protections that ensure that a county cannot
simply shift its obligations to plan for low-income households
to another jurisdiction. They argue that requirements in current
law exist to ensure that the fair share provisions of RHNA are
maintained and that every jurisdiction is planning for the
housing needs of all income groups.
Committee Amendments
Remove the broad language in the current bill allowing unlimited
AB 679
Page 5
transfers that are not proportional across income categories and
replace it with the expired Napa-specific transfer statute that
allows the county to transfer 15% of its lower-income RHNA to
cities within the county without having to transfer at the
higher income levels if it provides funds to build the units.
This statute contains a variety of checks and balances to ensure
that Napa County is also pursuing affordable housing development
in the unincorporated area at the same time that it is funding
affordable housing development within cities.
In reactivating the Napa-specific statute, make the following
changes to the existing language:
1)Delete the June 30, 2007, sunset date and replace with October
31, 2022.
2)Delete the requirement that the receiving city demonstrates
that it has met, in the current or previous housing element
cycle, at least 20 percent of its share of the regional need
for housing for very low-income households allocated to the
city.
Double-Referred
This bill was also referred to the Local Government Committee,
where it is scheduled to be heard on May 11 should it pass out
of this committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of Napa
Opposition
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Analysis Prepared by : Anya Lawler / H. & C.D. / (916)
319-2085