21 Elements 2019 Law Update I want to start by saying that this powerpoint is a pretty high level overview. In your packets you should have also received a word document that summarizes the bills in a slightly more detail and a table that summarizes them in more detail.

Context High priority for governor “Our state’s affordability crisis is undermining the California Dream and the foundations of our economic well-being. Families should be able to live near where they work. They shouldn’t live in constant fear of eviction or spend their whole paycheck to keep a roof overhead. That’s increasingly the case throughout California.” Legislature wants action and distrusts cities “The Legislature’s intent (is) curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density of, or render infeasible housing development projects…” Broad public concern about housing It is helpful to start the legal overview with a little context. The new governor is much more interested in housing than Governor Brown was. Governor Newson has repeatedly identified housing as a top priority for him and has indicated that he will be supportive of many different policies from tenant protections to automatic approvals. The legislature is equally interested in housing. It’s a little hard to read the tea leaves this early, but generally in past cycles they have viewed cities as an obstacle and that is likely not to change. Also, in past legislative sessions, the legislature was somewhat restrained by the fact that the governor was not supportive of big housing changes. They held their fire in a lot of cases knowing it would not be approved. Finally, there is broad concern for housing. It ranks as one of voters top issues and surveys consistently report the public wants something done.

Public Opinion This is just a little more context about the public perception about housing. I think we all know that the public is concerned, this graph shows who they blame. Mostly they blame developers followed by employers, but the third line is telling. More than 2/3 of residents blame local governments for opposing new developments. When deciding which bills to support, the legislature will be thinking about public opinion. If they think residents blame local governments, they are probably more likely to support bills that curtail local authority.

Bill Overview 2,628 bills in the legislature Over 200 housing bills It’s too early to tell what is likely to pass and there hundreds of bills so it is not possible to summarize all of them. To put it in perspective, on the right are 10 pages of housing bill summaries. Each bill has about a paragraph written about it. There are another 44 pages beyond that supplied by the county legislative team. I’ll focus on a handful of the most important and refer you to the attachments for more detail.

Timeline Second hearing second house First hearing second house Floor vote in second house Reconciliation New votes on floor Floor vote in first house Bill introduced First hearing Second hearing Governor’s signature We are here It is really important to remember that we are very early in the process. Here is a theoretical path that a bill takes to become a law. We are here (animation). If they bills become laws, they are likely to change a lot before they are signed. What starts out looking one way might look completely different in the end. Sept

Key Bills Tenants rights ADUs Zoning and housing approvals Fees and transparency Streamlining Public lands Funding Other planning topics There are a lot of bills and there is not time to talk about them all. I’m going to talk about some of the bigger changes and again in your packet you have more information about all of the bills. I just want to add a caveat that I am not an expert about all of these bills. In many cases, I only know the top line summary and would have to look into detailed questions.

Tenant Protections 6+ bills Rent stabilization applied to more units Requires just cause for eviction Emergency rental assistance There are at least 6 bills that expanded tenant protections. The most significant of them allow cities to apply rent stabilization to more units. For example, AB 36 allows cities to apply it to 10 year old buildings. Two bills limit no fault cause evictions. (No fault means that the tenant did not do something wrong, the tenant is being evicted through no fault of their own.)

ADUs Limits ability to apply zoning standards/owner occupancy Limits impact fees Small Home Building Code Again we have at least 6 bills. Generally they limit the ability for cities to charge fees, apply certain rules like FAR, and what could be really helpful, to have a small building code. There is also a proposal to require Housing Elements to have ADU incentives and a long shot bill to let affordable ADUs built by nonprofits to be sold separately

Zoning Approval 4 different bills to upzone in some areas or prevent downzoning There are 4 different bills that seeks to make it easier for housing to get built. Most offer additional height or density, one prevents downzoning. I’m going to concentrate on SB 50 in the most detail at the end

Other Streamlining Faster affordable housing EIR lawsuit reviews Modifications to SB 35 (increasing affordability level) To move

Transparency Public Lands Funding Requirements to post information online Public Lands Provide information on publicly owned land Allows affordable housing on surplus land Funding Many different funding opportunities

Other Limits on single family homes for RHNA

SB 50 Goal to increase housing in job rich or transit rich areas Increases height, FAR, density Reduces parking and discretionary review Contains some protections Our inclusionary housing affordable housing requirements apply Before I start talking about SB 50, I want to caveat it that there is very little clear about the proposal. The language changes weekly and there are no definitive summaries. The rules might have changed since I did my research and some of the analysis that I relied on may not be 100% accurate. Everything I am going to say should be taken as mostly accurate, subject to additional verification. SB 50s goal is to increase housing, particularly near transit and jobs. It is controversial because it changes zoning in areas around transit or in job rich areas. Specifically it changes the rules near transit and near jobs. The transit rules are more clear, the job rich definition is still unclear. Specifically, depening on if it is job rich or transit rich Increases height, FAR, density Reduces parking and discretionary review Contains some protections Our inclusionary housing affordable housing requirements apply

SB 50 Qualifying Area Height FAR Parking Density Jobs Rich No change   Jobs Rich No change No more than 0.5 space/unit Waived Transit Rich ¼ Mile “High Quality Bus Corridors/Stops” ½ Mile Major Rail Stop or Ferry Terminal 45 ft 2.5 ¼ Mile Major Rail Stop or Ferry Terminal 55 ft 3.25 This chart shows the basic rules for qualifying development. You can see the first row under the header are the rules for jobs rich area. These are not so well defined, but we’ll talk about mapping in a few minutes. You can see developers in job rich areas have to follow our existing height and FAR rules, but can provide fewer parking spots and build more units. The next category is transit rich areas and this is split three ways: areas within ¼ mile of a rapid bus, areas within ¼ mile of caltrain, BART or a ferry and areas within ½ mile of a train or ferry. Developers can build up to 45 or 55 feet in these areas. No parking is required and again there are no restrictions on density. Developers could also ask for 3 incentives associated with the density bonus law.

SB 50 Map More on definition of job rich and transit rich and exclusion areas

SB 50 Map More on definition of job rich and transit rich and exclusion areas

SB 50 Protections Comply with applicable requirements and other relevant standards Meet one of two on-site inclusionary requirements (cities existing or minimum as set by SB50) Does not contain housing occupied by tenants in past seven years or Ellis Act eviction in past fifteen years (includes vacant or demolished properties at the time of application) There are a number of rules meant to protect existing residents. Most importantly, the property could not have been occupied by a tenant for 7 years. Also, the local inclusionary zoning ordinance applies (unless the ones in the bill, which vary by size of development, are higher).

Questions I’m going to end with a slide that says questions, but with a reminder that there are so many bills out there I might have to get back to you about some specifics.