BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  April 15, 2015


                                   Ed Chau, Chair

          AB 35  
          (Chiu) - As Amended April 6, 2015

          SUBJECT:  Income taxes:  credits:  low-income housing:   
          allocation increase

          SUMMARY:  Makes changes to the state Low-Income Housing Tax  
          Credit (LIHTC) Program.       Specifically, this bill:  

          1)Beginning in 2015 and each year thereafter, increases the  
            allocation of state LIHTC by an additional $300 million and  
            adjusts that amount for inflation beginning in 2016.

          2)Provides that a sponsor that receives an award of 9% federal  
            LIHTC cannot receive an allocation from the additional $300  
            million of state LIHTC but shall remain eligible for the $70  
            million allocation available prior to 2015.  

          3)Provides a newly constructed or the rehabilitation portion of  
            an existing low-income housing project that is not located in  
            a Difficult to Develop Area (DDA) or a Qualified Census Tract  
            (QCT) and receives federal 4%  LIHTC is eligible for  
            cumulative state LIHTC over four years of 50% of the qualified  
            basis of the building. 


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  2

          4)Provides the acquisition portion of an existing low-income  
            housing project that is not located in a DDA or a QCT and  
            receives federal 4% LIHTC is eligible for state LIHTC over  
            four years of 13% of the qualified basis of the building.    

          5)Allows the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) to replace  
            federal LIHTC with state LIHTC for a new or existing  
            low-income housing project that is a located in a DDA or QCT  
            and receives federal 4% LIHTC of up to 50% of the qualified  
            basis of the building, provided that the total amount of  
            credits does not exceed 130%.  

          6)Provides that a low-income housing project is eligible for a  
            cumulative state LIHTC of 95% of the qualified basis of the  
            building over four years of the eligible basis if it meets all  
            of the following requirements:

             a)   It is at least 15 years old;

             b)   It is a SRO, special needs housing building, is in a  
               rural area, or serves households with very-low income or  
               extremely low-income residents;

             c)   It is serving households of very low-income or extremely  
               low-income provided that the average income at the time of  
               admission is no more than 45% of the median gross income  
               adjusted for household size; and 

             d)   It would have insufficient state credits to qualify to  
               complete substantial rehabilitation due to a low appraised  


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  3

          1)Adds the following definitions:

             a)   "Extremely low-income" has the same meaning as Health  
               and Safety Code Section 50053.

             b)   "Rural area" means a rural area as defined in Health and  
               Safety Code Section 50199.21.

             c)   "Special needs housing" has the same meaning as  
               paragraph (4) of Subdivision (g) of Section 10325 of Title  
               4 of the California Code of Regulations. 

             d)   "SRO" means single room occupancy.

             e)   "Very low-income" has the same meaning as in Health and  
               Safety Code Section 50053.   

           EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Allows TCAC to award state LIHTCs to developments in a QCT or  
            a DDA if the project is also receiving federal LIHTC, under  
            the following conditions: 

             a)   Developments restrict at least 50% of the units to  
               special needs households; and


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  4

             b)   The state credits do not exceed 130% of the eligible  
               basis of the building. 

          1)Allows TCAC to replace federal LIHTC with state LIHTC of up to  
            130% of a project's eligible basis if the federal LIHTC is  
            reduced in an equivalent amount. 

          2)Defines a QTC as any census tract designated by the Department  
            of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in which either 50% or  
            more of the households have an income that is less than 60% of  
            the area median gross income or that has a poverty rate of at  
            least 25%.

          3)Defines a DDA as an area designated by HUD on an annual basis  
            that has high construction, land, and utility costs relative  
            to area median gross income.

          4)Provides that a low-income housing development that is a new  
            building and is receiving 9% federal LIHTC credits is eligible  
            to receive state LIHTC over four years of 30% of the qualified  
            basis of the building. 

          5)Provides that a low-income housing development that is a new  
            building that is receiving federal LIHTC that is "at risk of  
            conversion" is eligible to receive state LIHTC over four years  
            of 13% of the qualified basis of the building. 

          6)Defines "at risk of conversion" to mean a property that  
            satisfies all of the following criteria:

             a)   A multifamily rental housing development in which at  
               least 50% of the units receive government assistance  
               pursuant to any of the following:

             b)   Project based Section 8 vouchers;

             c)   Below-Market-Interest-Rate Program;


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  5

             d)   Federal Rental Housing Assistance Program; 

             e)   Programs for rent supplement assistance pursuant to  
               Section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of  

             f)   Programs pursuant to Section 515 of the Housing Act of  
               1949; and 

             g)   Federal LIHTC.    

        1)Includes an urgency clause. 

          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown. 


           Background  :  

          In 1986, the federal government authorized the LIHTC program to  
          enable affordable housing developers to raise private capital  
          through the sale of tax credits to investors. Two types of  
          federal tax credits are available and are generally referred to  
          as nine percent (9%) and four percent (4%) credits. TCAC  
          administers the program and awards credits to qualified  
          developers who can then sell those credits to private investors  
          who use the credits to reduce their federal tax liability. The  
          developer in turn invests the capital into the affordable  
          housing project. 


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  6

          Each state receives an annual ceiling of 9% federal tax credits.  
          In 2015 it was $2.30 per capita, which worked out to $88.5  
          million in credits in California that can be taken by investors  
          each year for 10 years. Federal LIHTCs are oversubscribed by a  
          3:1 ratio. Unlike 9% LIHTC, federal 4% tax credits are not  
          capped, however they must be used in conjunction with tax-exempt  
          private activity mortgage revenue bonds which are capped and are  
          administered by the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee.  
          In 2015, the state ceiling for private activity bonds is set at  
          $5.61 billion. The value of the 4% tax credits are less than  
          half of the 9% tax credits and, as a result, 4% federal credits  
          are generally used in conjunction with another funding source  
          like state housing bonds or local funding sources. In 2014,  
          developers only used $80.5 million in annual federal 4% tax  
          credits, significantly less than prior years.   The loss of  
          redevelopment funding and state housing bond funds, which were  
          used in combination with 4% federal credits to achieve higher  
          affordability, has made the 4% federal credits less effective. 

          In 1987, the legislature authorized a state LIHTC program to  
          augment the federal tax credit program. State tax credits can  
          only be awarded to projects that also receive federal LIHTCs,  
          except for farmworker housing projects, which can receive state  
          credits without federal credits.   Investors can claim the state  
          credit over four years. TCAC has authority for approximately  
          $103 million in state tax credits each year but has as many as  
          $25 million in credits remaining at the end of the year due to  
          lack of demand.  Projects that receive either state or federal  
          tax credits are required to maintain the housing at affordable  
          levels for 55 years.

           Purpose of this bill  :  


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  7

          According to the author, "California is undergoing a serious  
          housing affordability crisis with a shortfall of over one  
          million affordable homes. According to a 2014 report by the  
          California Housing Partnership Corporation, median rents in  
          California have increased by over 20 percent while the median  
          income has dropped by 8 percent. The private housing market is  
          simply not meeting the demand for low to moderate income homes.  
          The shortage is particularly challenging in the rental market,  
          typically the last resort for lower-income households, many of  
          whom were forced out of single-family homes during the great  

          State and Federal divestment in affordable housing has  
          exacerbated this problem. With the elimination of California's  
          redevelopment agencies and the exhaustion of state housing  
          bonds, California has reduced its funding for the development  
          and preservation of affordable homes by 79 percent -- from  
          approximately $1.7 billion a year to nearly nothing. There is  
          currently no permanent source of funding to compensate for this  

          The housing crisis has contributed to a growing homeless  
          population, increased pressure on local public safety nets, an  
          unstable development and construction marketplace, and the  
          outward migration of thousands of long-time California  

          The LIHTC program is the only major source of funding available  
          for affordable development in the state, making it competitive  
          and overprescribed. In 2014, only 49 percent of applicants were  
          awarded credits - leaving many qualified projects without a  
          secure source of funding or any incentive to build additional  
          affordable housing units."


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  8

           The proposal  :  

          AB 35 would increase the state LIHTC allocation by an additional  
          $300 million which would allow the state to leverage and  
          additional $200 million in federal 4% LIHTC and at least $400  
          million in federal tax-exempt bond authority annually for the  
          creation and preservation of affordable rental homes for a broad  
          range of lower income households through the state.  An increase  
          in the amount of state LIHTC would help to fill the gap in  
          funding that was created by the loss of redevelopment and the  
          exhaustion of state voter-approved bonds.  In addition to  
          increasing the total amount of state LIHTC, AB 35 proposes to  
          increase the amount of state tax credits awarded to a project  
          that is also receiving 4% federal tax credits from 13% to 50% of  
          the qualified basis. This would more than triple the amount of  
          equity that an investor purchasing a state tax credit would  
          receive which would bring the return on 4% credits in line with  
          9% credits and result in greater affordability for the project. 

          Federal LIHTC can be used anywhere in the state, but projects  
          are given an additional 30% boost on their eligible basis if the  
          project is located in a DDA or a QCT. Because these areas by  
          definition have a higher-poverty level and there is a higher  
          concentration of extremely low-income or homeless individuals  
          and families, housing needs deep subsidy to make it affordable.  
          Existing state law does not allow state tax credits to be  
          awarded in DDAs and QCTs with one exception: housing  
          developments where 50% of the units are for special needs  
          populations. The rationale for this prohibition is projects in  
          these areas can qualify for more federal tax credits and  
          therefore are already advantaged. AB 35 would also allow state  
          tax credits to be awarded to projects without regard to DDA or  
          QCT status with the main purpose of providing enough state tax  
          credits to match the value of a 9% federal tax credit. 


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  9

           Older housing stock:   

          Many low-income housing developments in the state are older and  
          in need of rehabilitation.  These projects need higher levels of  
          equity investments because of their age , level of repairs  
          needed, and the low rents. It is hard for these projects to  
          compete for state tax credits because the assessed value is low  
          and therefore the eligible basis upon which the amount of tax  
          credits the project can qualify for is also low. To assist these  
          projects, AB 35 would allow these older projects to receive  
          state tax credits of 95% over four years.  To qualify projects  
          would need to be at least 15 years old, serve low- and extremely  
          low-income households, be an SRO, in a rural area, and have  
          insufficient state credits to complete substantial  
          rehabilitation due to a low appraised value. 

           Technical amendment:


          On page 6, line 36, delete "45" and replace it with "42" 

          On page 7, line 4, delete "45" and replace it with "42"

          On page 20, line 33, delete "45" and replace it with "42"

          On page 21, line 1, delete "45" and replace it with "42"

          On page 35, line 11, delete "45" and replace it with "42"


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  10

          On page 35, line 19 delete "45" and replace it with "42"




          A Community of Friends (ACOF)

          Affirmed Housing Group

          Affordable Housing Access (AHA)

          Affordable Housing Management Association-Pacific Southwest  

          Alameda County Housing Authority

          Alpha Construction

          American Planning Association California Chapter (APA  

          Amy Hiestand Consulting


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  11

          Angelus Plaza

          Apartment Association

          Apartment Association of Orange County

          Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)

          Bridge Housing

          Burbank Housing Corporation

          Burbank Housing Development Corporation

          Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation (CEDC)

          California Alliance for Retired Americans

          California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies  

          California Building Industry Association (CBIA)

          California Center for Cooperative Development


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  12

          California Coalition for Rural Housing

          California Coalition for Youth (CCY)

          California Council for Affordable Housing (CCAH)

          California Housing Consortium (CHC)

          California Infill Builders Federation

          California Partnership to End Domestic Violence 

          California Southern Cities

          California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation 

          Capitol Area Development Authority (CADA)

          City of Concord

          City of Emeryville

          City of Eureka

          City of Fremont


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  13

          City of Lafayette

          City of Lakeport

          City of Livermore

          City of Napa

          City of National City

          City of Oakland

          City of Sacramento

          City of San Diego

          City of Santa Barbara

          City of Taft

          City of Tulare

          City of Union City

          Community Action North Bay (CAN-B)


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  14

          Community Economics

          Community Housing Opportunities Corporation (CHOC)

          Community Housing Partnership

          Community Land Trust Association (CLAM)

          Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse (CORA)

          Contra Costa Interfaith Housing

          Core Affordable Housing

          Corporation For Supportive Housing (CSH)

          Devine & Gong, Ink

          Domus Development

          Downtown Women's Center 

          Dr. Jaime Becker

          EAH Housing


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  15

          East Bay Developmental Disabilities Legislative Coalition

          East Bay Rental Housing Association

          Eden Housing

          Goldfarb & Lipman LLP

          Habitat for Humanity

          Highridge Costa Investors, LLC

          HIP Housing, Inc.

          HKIT Architects

          Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara (HACSC)

          Housing Authority of the City of San Buenaventura

          Housing Authority of the City of Santa Barbara

          Housing California

          Housing Choices Coalition


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  16

          Housing Consortium of the East Bay (HCEB)

          Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County

          Housing Trust Silicon Valley

          Hudson Housing Capital

          Iturriaga, Nicole, MA

          Iturriaga, Rodolfo H., Ph.D.


          Korean Resource center (KRC)

          Larkin Street Youth Services

          Laurin Associates

          Law Foundation of Silicon Valley

          Leading Age California

          League of California Cities


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  17

          League of Women Voters of California (Support if Amended)

          Leich, Douglas A.

          LINC Housing

          Little Tokyo Service Center CDC (LTSC CDC)

          Loaves & Fishes

          Loni Gray

          Los Angeles Community Action Network (LA CAN)

          Lutheran Office of Public Policy - California

          Lynette Jung Lee

          Many Mansions

          Mercy Housing

          Nancy Lewis Associates, Inc.

          Napa Valley Community Housing (NVCH)


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  18


          Neighbor Works Orange County

          Nelson Rental Consultant

          Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (NPH)

          Nor Cal Rental Property Association

          North Bay Leadership Council

          North Valley Property Owners Association

          Northern California Community Loan Fund

          Orange Coast Interfaith Shelter

          Pacific West Communities

          Palm Communities

          Peoples' Self-Help Housing

          PEP Housing


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  19

          Phil Ritter, CPA

          Powell & Partners Architects

          Project Access Recourse Center

          Promise Energy Inc.

          Retirement Housing Foundation (RHF)

          Rural Communities Assistance Corporation (RCAC)

          Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC)

          Rural Smart Growth Task Force

          Rystad, Robert D.

          Sacramento Homeless Organizing Committee (SHOC)

          San Diego County Apartment Association (SDCAA)

          San Diego Housing Federation

          San Diego Organizing Project (SDOP)


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  20

          San Francisco Housing Action Coalition

          San Francisco Unified School District

          San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund (HTF)

          Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA)

          Schreiber, Debora

          Shelter Partnership

          Silicon Valley Bank 

          Skid Row Housing Trust

          Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group

          Southern California Association of Non Profit Housing (SCANPH)

          St. Anthony Foundation

          St. Vincent's

          T.R.U.S.T. South LA


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  21


          The Kennedy Commission

          Thomas Safran & Associates


          Trinity Center Walnut Greek

          Urban Habitat

          Venice Community Housing Corporation

          Ward Economic Development Corporation (WEDC)

          Western Center on Law and Poverty 

          Western Seniors Housing

          Wolfe, Marian, Ph.D.


          Yolo Housing


                                                                      AB 35

                                                                    Page  22


          None on file.

          Analysis Prepared by:Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085