BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2536|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2536
Author: Carter (D)
Amended: 8/20/10 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/22/10
AYES: Lowenthal, Huff, DeSaulnier, Harman, Pavley,
Simitian
NO VOTE RECORDED: Ashburn, Kehoe, Oropeza
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-0, 7/15/10
AYES: Kehoe, Corbett, Emmerson, Leno, Price, Walters,
Wolk, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alquist, Wyland, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 6/3/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Housing bond allocations for emergency and
supportive
housing
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill allows the Deprtment of Housing and
Community Development to expend specified bond funds
earmarked for the Emergency Housing Assistance Program
(EHAP) either for the EHAP program or for the Supportive
Housing Program.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/20/10 add double-jointing
CONTINUED
AB 2536
Page
2
language with
AB 2762 (Assembly Housing and Community Development
Committee).
ANALYSIS : As approved by the voters, the Housing and
Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2002, Proposition 46,
authorized the issuance of $2.1 billion in general
obligation bonds to finance various affordable housing
programs, most of which the Deprtment of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) administers. Among other
things, Proposition 46 included funds for the following
programs:
$910 million for the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP),
which funds the new construction, rehabilitation, and
preservation of permanent and transitional rental homes for
lower income households, through loans to local governments
and developers.
$195 for the Supportive Housing Program, a subprogram of
MHP which funds rental homes with support services for
persons who have a disability and are homeless or at
imminent risk of becoming homeless.
$195 for EHAP, which provides grants for the
rehabilitation, renovation, expansion, and site acquisition
of emergency shelters and transitional homes for homeless
individuals.
In November 2006, California voters approved Proposition
1C, the $2.85 billion Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust
Fund Act of 2006. Among other things, Proposition 1C
included funds for the following programs:
$345 million for MHP
$195 million for the Supportive Housing Program
$50 million for EHAP
On May 13, 2010, HCD issued a Notice of Funding
Availability under the EHAP Program soliciting applications
for $40 million in available funds. To the extent that all
of these funds are awarded, this will exhaust the
Proposition 46 EHAP funds and dip into $20 million of the
Proposition 1C allocation. HCD expects to offer and award
AB 2536
Page
3
the remaining $30 million in EHAP funds in 2011.
This bill:
1. Allows HCD to expend the funds earmarked for EHAP in
both Propositions 46 and 1C either for EHAP or for the
Supportive Housing Program.
2. Adds double-jointing language with AB 2762 (Assembly
Housing and Community Development Committee).
Comments
Since the passage of Proposition 46 in 2002, HCD has
received $300 million in applications and made $171 million
in awards under EHAP. Because of the relatively large
amount of money available for EHAP under Proposition 46,
only $7 million of these awards have come from Proposition
1C funds as HCD generally has tried to exhaust Proposition
46 funds before tapping into Proposition 1C funds.
In spite of the large amount of funds awarded to date, the
EHAP program has had its challenges. Because these EHAP
funds come from general obligation bonds, HCD can only fund
capital improvements, not operating costs. Shelter
operators have always had difficulty arranging operating
grants, never more so than now as public and philanthropic
entities cut back support. As a result, many operators are
reluctant to build or expand. In addition, HCD's $1
million limit on EHAP awards may not work for larger
projects that cost more than $1 million but have few other
sources of revenue. While the needs of the homeless have
not gone away, these factors have surely dampened demand
for EHAP funds.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
AB 2536
Page
4
Bond fund redirection Potential
cost pressures of up
Bond*
to $30,000 to the extent HCD
used EHAP funds for supportive
housing under MHP
*Potential shift from the Emergency Housing Assistance Fund
to the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/2/10)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Corporation for Supportive Housing
County of Los Angeles
Housing California
Western Center on Law and Poverty
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : This bill seeks to expand the
funding options for providers seeking to assist and serve
the state's homeless population. According to the author's
office, a substantial amount of EHAP funding remains
available while the Supportive Housing Program is
oversubscribed and has a limited amount of funding
remaining to finance the many projects ready to go.
Moreover, in recent years the focus of efforts to combat
homelessness have shifted from simply providing shelter to
the more comprehensive "housing first" model, in which
homeless persons are placed in housing first and they
encouraged to take advantage supportive services, such as
drug and alcohol treatment, mental health counseling, and
workforce training. These housing first projects are
eligible for funding under the Supportive Housing Program
but not under EHAP. Therefore, it makes sense to make the
EHAP funds available for all approaches that serve homeless
individuals and families.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong,
AB 2536
Page
5
Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick,
Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,
Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue,
Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez,
Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico,
Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Audra Strickland, Vacancy
JJA:do 8/23/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****