BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 679
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 11, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 679 (Allen) - As Amended: May 2, 2011
SUBJECT : Land use: housing element
SUMMARY : Allows Napa County, until October 31, 2022, to meet up
to 15% of its existing share of the regional housing need for
lower-income households by committing funds for the construction
of affordable housing units, and constructing those units in one
or more cities within the county, if specified conditions are
met.
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.
2)Until June, 2007, allowed Napa County to meet up to 15% of its
existing share of the regional housing need for lower-income
households by committing funds for the purpose of constructing
affordable housing units, and constructing those units in one
or more cities with the county, only after all of the
following conditions were met:
a) An agreement was executed between the county and the
receiving city or cities, following a public hearing held
by the county and the receiving city or cities to solicit
public comments on the draft agreement. The agreement must
contain:
i) A plan and schedule for timely construction of
dwelling units;
ii) Site identification by street address for the units
to be developed;
iii) A statement either that the sites upon which the
units will be developed were identified in the receiving
AB 679
Page 2
city's housing element as potential sites for the
development of housing for lower-income households, or
that the units will be developed on previously
unidentified sites; and,
iv) The number and percentage of the county's
lower-income housing needs previously transferred.
b) The council of governments (COG) that assigned the
county's share receives and approves each proposed
agreement to meet a portion of the county's fair share
housing allocation within one or more of the cities within
the county;
c) The city or cities in which the units are developed
agreed not to count the units towards their share of the
region's affordable housing need.
d) The county and the receiving city or cities, based on
substantial evidence on the record, make the following
findings:
i) Adequate sites with appropriate zoning exist in the
receiving city or cities to accommodate the units to be
developed;
ii) If needed, additional subsidy or financing for the
construction of the units is available;
iii) The receiving city or cities have housing elements
that have been found by the Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) to be in compliance.
e) If the sites upon which units are to be developed were
previously identified in the receiving city's housing
element as potential sites, then the receiving city must
amend its housing element to identify replacement sites, as
specified;
f) The county and receiving city or cities must complete
the annual report and provide to HCD;
g) For a period of five years after a transfer occurs,
requires the report to include information on the status of
transferred units, implementation of the terms and
AB 679
Page 3
conditions of the transfer agreement, and information on
any dwelling units actually constructed, including the
number, type, location, and affordability requirements.
h) Provides that the receiving city must demonstrate that
it has met, in the current or previous housing element
cycle, at least 20% of its share of the regional need for
housing for very low-income households allocated to the
city.
i) Provides that the credit that the county receives shall
not exceed 40% of the number of units that are affordable
to lower-income households and constructed and occupied
during the same housing element cycle in unincorporated
areas of the county, as specified.
j) Provides that HCD, concurrent with review by the COG,
must evaluate the agreement to determine whether the city
or cities are in substantial compliance.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)In 1996, Napa County successfully pursued legislation ƯAB 3452
(V. Brown), Chapter 1018, Statues of 1996] to allow the county
to transfer a portion of its lower-income regional housing
needs assessment (RHNA) 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
included a sunset date of June 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.
2)Napa County's special transfer authority was extended in 2000
by AB 2430 (Wiggins), Chapter 358, Statutes of 2000, which
allowed the county to pursue non-proportional transfers
through June of 2007. AB 2430 also placed additional
conditions on the transfers, including limiting the number of
units transferred to not exceed 40% of the number of
lower-income units built in the unincorporated area during the
AB 679
Page 4
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 30, 2007.
3)This bill re-enacts certain provisions of the Napa-specific
transfer statute that would allow 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. The provisions of re-enactment
language will sunset on October 31, 2022. As well, this bill
deletes the requirement that the receiving city demonstrates
that it has met, in the current or previous housing element
cycle, at least 20% of its share of the regional need for
housing for very low-income households allocated to the city,
which was included in the previous version transfer statute.
This bill 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.
4)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 currently being litigated.
5)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
AB 679
Page 5
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.
6)Napa 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 state law. This
bill is one of two bills that Napa County is sponsoring to
provide more flexibility. This Committee previously heard
AB 542 (Allen) on April 6, 2011, which passed on a 9-0 vote and
was subsequently amended in the Housing Committee.
7)Support arguments: This bill allows Napa County to meet up to
15% of its existing share
of the regional housing need for lower-income households by
committing funds for the construction of affordable housing
units, and constructing those units in one or more cities
within the county. These provisions allow flexibility for
Napa County in meeting requirements for affordable housing
given the variety of unique circumstances in the County.
Opposition arguments: 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.
8)This bill was heard by the Assembly Housing and Community
Development Committee on April 27, 2011, where it passed on a
4-0 vote, with amendments.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of Napa
Opposition
AB 679
Page 6
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Analysis Prepared by : Debbie Michel / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958