BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 1793|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 1793
          Author:   Chau (D)
          Amended:  6/17/14 in Senate
          Vote:     21


           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE  :  11-0, 6/24/14
          AYES:  DeSaulnier, Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso,  
            Lara, Liu, Pavley, Roth, Wyland

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  77-0, 5/27/14 (Consent) - See last page for  
            vote


           SUBJECT  :    Housing successors:  reporting requirements

           SOURCE  :     Housing California


           DIGEST  :    This bill requires a housing successor to include in  
          its annual report an inventory of homeownership units assisted  
          by the former redevelopment agency or the housing successor.

           ANALYSIS  :    Historically, the Community Redevelopment Law  
          allowed a local government to establish a redevelopment area and  
          capture all of the increase in property taxes generated within  
          the area (referred to as "tax increment") over a period of  
          decades.  The law requires redevelopment agencies (RDA) to  
          deposit 20% of tax increment into a Low and Moderate Income  
          Housing Fund (L&M Fund) to be used to increase, improve, and  
          preserve the community's supply of low- and moderate-income  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1793
                                                                     Page  
          2

          housing available at an affordable housing cost.

          Many agencies used a portion of these funds to support  
          homeownership, for which the law generally requires that the  
          units remain available at an affordable housing cost to, and  
          occupied by, low- or moderate-income households for 45 years.   
          Alternatively, an agency was allowed to permit sales of  
          ownership units at market prices prior to 45 years if it adopted  
          a program, such as equity sharing, which ensured that the  
          agency's initial investment would return to assist other  
          households.

          In 2011, the Legislature enacted two bills, AB 26X1  
          (Blumenfield, Chapter 5, First Extraordinary Session) and AB 27  
          X1 (Blumenfield, Chapter 6, First Extraordinary Session).  AB 26  
          X1 eliminated redevelopment agencies and established procedures  
          for winding down the agencies, paying off enforceable  
          obligations, and disposing of agency assets.  AB 26 X1 included  
          provisions allowing the host city or county of a dissolving  
          redevelopment agency to retain the housing assets and functions  
          previously performed by the agency, except for funds on deposit  
          in the agency's L&M Fund, and thus become a housing successor.   
          If the host city or county chooses not to become the housing  
          successor, a local housing authority or the Department of  
          Housing and Community Development (HCD) takes on that  
          responsibility.

          AB 27 X1 allowed redevelopment agencies to avoid elimination if  
          they made payments to schools in the current budget year and in  
          future years.  In December 2011, the California Supreme Court in  
          California Redevelopment Association v. Matosantos upheld AB 26  
          X1 and overturned AB 27 X1.  As a result, all of the state's  
          roughly 400 redevelopment agencies dissolved on February 1,  
          2012, and housing successors assumed the former redevelopment  
          agencies' housing assets and functions, including the interest  
          in homeownership deed restrictions.

          SB 341 (DeSaulnier, Chapter 796, Statutes of 2013) updated  
          redevelopment laws to revise the rules governing the activities  
          and expenditures of housing successors to reflect the new  
          situation.  Among other things, that bill required housing  
          successors to report various items of information annually.

          This bill requires a housing successor to include in its annual  







                                                                    AB 1793
                                                                     Page  
          3

          report an inventory of homeownership units assisted by the  
          former redevelopment agency or the housing successor that  
          includes the following:

           The number of such units.

           In the first report pursuant to this subsection, the number of  
            such units lost to the portfolio since February 1, 2012, and  
            the reason or reasons for these losses.  For all subsequent  
            reports, the number of such units lost to the portfolio in the  
            last fiscal year and the reason or reasons for these losses.

           Any funds returned to the housing successor as part of an  
            equity sharing or similar program.

           Whether the housing successor has contracted with any entity  
            for the management of such units and, if so, the name of the  
            entity.

           Comments
           
          According to the author's office, redevelopment agencies  
          assisted tens of thousands of below market-rate homeownership  
          units that are subject to deed restrictions or equity-sharing  
          agreements that must be monitored and enforced to recapture or  
          retain affordability.  Due to the fact that most housing  
          successors now have either no income or limited and sporadic  
          income, they are struggling to enforce these restrictions,  
          putting at jeopardy the long-term affordability of the units.

          According to a recent survey of housing successors, a majority  
          of responding agencies lost a significant amount of their  
          designated funding for managing these units and have laid off  
          over half of their staff responsible for managing or monitoring  
          affordable housing programs.  One-third of responding agencies  
          have seen affordable housing lost to foreclosure since the  
          elimination of RDAs, and two-thirds expect it to happen.

          This bill seeks to gather better data on the problem so that the  
          Legislature and stakeholders can develop effective responses.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No








                                                                    AB 1793
                                                                     Page  
          4

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/5/14)

          Housing California (source)
          Association of California Cities- Orange County
          Buckelew Programs
          Los Angeles County

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  77-0, 5/27/14
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian  
            Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,  
            Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,  
            Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,  
            Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez,  
            Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal,  
            Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi,  
            Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Perea, John A. P�rez, V.  
            Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas,  
            Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski,  
            Wilk, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Patterson, Quirk-Silva, Vacancy


          JA:ed  8/7/14   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****