State & Local Legislation
State Legislation
Proposition 90 Campaign: It's a Taxpayer Trap!
This November, Californians will vote on one of the most significant measures affecting local governments’ ability to implement progressive legislation to reach the ballot in years. Backers of this initiative want voters to believe that its focus is to "reform eminent domain" but that is just the bait in the trap. Its real goal is to prevent local governments from passing new laws. It would require payment for any new land-use laws adopted throughout the state. This would effectively make it impossible to do any of the following: protect air and water quality; require community benefits from developers; implement any kind of zoning in local neighborhoods; or even pass consumer protection laws.
Meanwhile, after passage of a similar measure in Oregon--a much smaller state--2,000 claims have been filed totaling more than four billion dollars. This figure doesn’t even include the costs to state and local governments to administer the claims. Who pays? Taxpayers. To read more about the coordinated attempt to dismantle environmental and land use protections throughout the American West, visit: http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=16409.
To get involved in the campaign to stop Prop 90, visit www.noprop90.com
Proposition 1C Campaign: Housing & Emergency Shelter
Placed before the voters this November, Proposition 1C, the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006, is a $2.85 billion general obligation that dedicates funds for affordable housing. Proposition 1C earmarks $725 million for rental housing, permanent housing for the homeless, and farm worker housing (expected to assist over 9,000 families) and $725 million for affordable homeownership programs (estimated to help over 23,000 families). Proposition 1C also provides $850 million for regional infill housing planning, $300 million to promote transit oriented development, and $200 million for the creation of urban, suburban, and rural parks.
The bond will help the most vulnerable population in California: 20,000 working families can buy their first home; 6,500 Californian workers can afford to rent in their communities; 2,000 homeless families can find shelter.
Proposition 1C essentially sustains the effective state programs funded by the voters in 2002 when they approved Proposition 46, the $2.1 general obligation bond dedicated towards affordable housing. Over the past four years Prop 46 programs have leveraged over $5.5 billion in private investment to create over 40,000 homes including rental apartments, farmworker housing, shelter beds and homeownership opportunities for low-to-moderate income Californians. The Bay Area alone has been awarded over $538 million which has helped create over 14,000 affordable homes. Proposition 1C would continue the success of these programs.
For information on Proposition 1C, please visit www.homes4CA.org or www.nonprofithousing.org. You can also contact Geeta Rao at the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (415) 989-8160 ext. 22, geeta@nonprofithousing.org.
Local Legislation
Richmond Council Expands Local Employment Program
Last month, the Richmond City Council approved a proposal that will strengthen and expand the City’s Local Employment Ordinance, opening the door to job opportunities for hundreds of Richmond residents. The Richmond City Council has been considering changes to Richmond’s Local Employment Ordinance since the policy was due to “sunset” in 2004. The Council had set ambitious goals of 30 percent local hiring for the proposed Point Molate casino project. However, it became clear that the City’s existing Local Employment Ordinance would not support the Council’s community hiring goals for this and other projects. City Council directed staff to work with community stakeholders to come up with an expanded policy modeled after successful programs in Bay Area cities like East Palo Alto, Berkeley and San Francisco.
The policy has been expanded to cover businesses that receive economic development subsidies and contracts from the City; expanded to cover operational jobs (whereas the previous policy covered only construction employment); the local hiring requirement has been raised from 20 percent to 30 percent for most job types; enforcement and implementation procedures have been strengthened and clarified; and funds have been allocated for staff monitoring of the policy.
The revised policy has won the support of a broad coalition of community, religious and labor organizations, including Richmond Vision 2000, Contra Costa Faith Works!, the Contra Costa Labor Council and Building Trades Council, Urban Habitat, and the East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy.
Oak to 9th Development Approval
On June 21, 2006 The Oakland City Council approved the controversial Oak to Ninth development south of Jack London Square, a 64-acre project that will help transform the waterfront as the city's largest housing development since World War II.
According to Amaha Kassa, Executive Director of the East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE), “We feel great about the community benefits that the coalition won, including the jobs agreement EBASE led on- 300 construction job opportunities for local residents and a $1.6 million job training fund”. “We also won nearly 500 deeply affordable housing units, the majority of them family-sized”. Congratulations are also due to Asian Pacific Environmental Network, Urban Strategies Center, East Bay Asian Youth Center and various Oakland community organizations that participated in the campaign.
Contra Costa Affordable Housing Clears Hurdle – One More to Go!
On July 11th, the Contra Costa County Planning Commission approved an ordinance to ensure that new residential developments include homes that are affordable to families with modest incomes.
The Planning Commission approval is a step in the right direction towards final approval of this important ordinance. However, the Planning Commission recommended changes that weaken the inclusionary housing ordinance and would create fewer affordable homes. The need for homes that teachers, hospital workers and government workers can afford is great and Contra Costa needs a strong inclusionary housing ordinance to meet that need.
The Board of Supervisors will vote on the inclusionary housing ordinance in September. The original proposal would have created a strong, effective ordinance. You can call the Supervisors to urge the Supervisors to adopt the originally proposed inclusionary housing ordinance now!
- John Gioia 510-374-3231
- Gayle Uilkema 925-335-1046
- Mary Piepho 925-820-8683
- Mark DeSaulnier 925-646-5763
- Federal Glover 925-427-8138
City of Pleasanton served with Housing Demand Letter
On June 20, Public Advocates, Inc. and Urban Habitat served a 14-page demand letter on the City of Pleasanton, which has blocked affordable housing development through its land-use policies and rigid growth control policies. The demand letter addresses four major issues: the City’s failure to undertake the rezoning of 30 to 40 acres for affordable housing that the City was required to complete two years ago, pursuant to the Housing Element of its General Plan; the voter-approved Housing Cap, which sets an absolute cap on growth at 29,000 units; the Growth Management Ordinance, which limits the number of residential units for which the City will issue building permits annually; and an effective moratorium on the approval of affordable housing development, particularly development of affordable housing for families with children.
The letter demands that the City (1) implement the rezoning program in its Housing Element to accommodate 871 high-density residential units; (2) set aside at least 609 units under its Housing Cap for very-low income housing, and 179 units for low-income housing – the remaining number of low- and very-low income units the City is required to accommodate to meet its share of the regional need under state Housing Element Law – to be built on the rezoned sites; (3) amend the Growth Management Ordinance and General Plan annual limit on residential building permits to exempt units needed to meet the City’s share of the regional need; and (4) issue a Request for Qualifications to qualified non-profit affordable housing developers to build the needed very-low and low-income units.
Urban Habitat, Public Advocates and the California Affordable Housing Law Project will be meeting with the Pleasanton City Manager on August 22, 2006.
Oakland’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance awaits resolution
Oaklanders for Affordable Housing has been working tirelessly to bring inclusionary zoning to Oakland and continues to await its resolution by the Oakland City Council. The coalition members include ACORN, Oakland Community Organizations, the Alameda Central Labor Council, Asian Pacific Environmental Network, East Bay Asian Youth Center, East Bay Community Law Center, East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, Greenbelt Alliance, Just Cause-Oakland, the Oakland Green Party, Nonprofit Housing Association, Public Advocates, Inc., and Urban Strategies Council.
In April, after considerable policy analysis and debate, the Coalition had drafted and put forward the Oakland Family Housing Act, a proposed Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance designed to meet Oakland's affordable housing needs. The Ordinance requires all new developments with five or more units to make at least 20 percent of the units affordable to families at a wide range of income levels - families of four earning between $25,150 and $83,800 per year. This policy would ensure that housing in Oakland is accessible to low-income communities.
Three members of the Oakland City Council, who have stalled inclusionary housing proposals for years, responded to the strong community pressure by proposing an alternative inclusionary zoning policy. The Council's policy, however, does not fully respond to Oakland's affordable housing needs or the City's obligations under state law. It would require 15 percent of the units in projects that are 20 units or larger to be affordable to families earning $50,280 per year for rental units and $83,800 per year for ownership units. Furthermore, this policy would not apply to many projects that are in the development “pipeline.”
The Council was scheduled to vote on the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance in July. However, a resolution that both the community coalition and the developers would support was not reached this summer. The coalition expects the City Council to take up this issue again in September.
Richmond Business Tax Placed on Ballot
Richmond voters will get a chance to raise about $11 million in new revenue by modifying the business license tax on manufacturers and large apartment complex landlords. The Richmond City Council has approved the measure for November's ballot. A simple majority of voters must give approval for the measure to become law. The measure would be the second voter-approved tax hike since the crippling, $35 million budget crisis in 2004 (following the crisis, voters approved a half-cent sales tax increase).
The city's budget is now balanced, with a healthy $10 million in reserves. But it is still short of police officers and firefighters, and costs for the Civic Center upgrade and much-needed road repairs loom. If the measure is approved, manufacturers would pay a 0.0125 percent tax on the value of raw materials used in production, or $1,250 for every $1 million of value. Landlords would pay $90 per residential rental unit for their first 25 units, $75 per unit for the next 35 and $55 per unit above 60.
Source: John Geluardi, The Contra Costa Times
Related items:
