Since cities don't directly "produce" housing but do allocate land for developers, the measure would eventually (some might say inevitably) affect local city decisions on where, at what allowable density levels and for what income levels to permit developers to build housing.

SB 828 by state Senator Scott Wiener (D, SF) is complex (full text as amended here) but reduced to its essentials requires the use of Sacramento specified factors -- with attention to "affordable" (below market/subsidized) housing, demographic considerations and desired outcomes -- in calculating numbers and regional allocations of "needed" housing units.

[Scroll down for further.]

SB 828 would prohibit SCAG from letting cities (like LB) use a prior "underproduction" of housing in some income categories and stable population numbers to justify calculating or reducing the number of RHNA "needed" housing units in various income levels.

It would further require SCAG's RHNA numbers to demonstrate efforts to reverse racial and wealth disparities by assigning additional weight to cities meeting Sacramento criteria in distributing the RHNA numbers among income categories.

SB 828 would also require SCAG to provide Sac'to with data on the "overcrowding rate" for a comparable housing market, and define the vacancy rate for a healthy housing market for those purposes as between 5% and 8% of both rental and ownership housing.

And it would require SCAG to include data on the percentage of households deemed "cost burdened," the rate of housing cost for a healthy housing market, and data on the projected household income growth.

Sponsor

Sponsor

SCAG's region covers 191 cities in six counties (L.A., OC, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura) and SCAG's governing "regional council" consists of 80+ elected officials. LB is allowed two SCAG reps (currently, as chosen by Mayor Garcia: Councilmembers Gonzalez and Richardson.)

The Aug. 16 vote advancing SB 828 to the Assembly floor follows approval by the other Assembly Committees and the full state Senate despite opposition by the City of Long Beach first expressed in an April 23 letter by City Manager Pat West and reiterated in a June 18 opposition letter. Unlike some more high-visibility bills, Mayor Garcia didn't sign either of the City's legislative position letters In both letters, City Manager West wrote that the City of LB "strongly opposes" SB 828, stating in part in April:

Through responsible local land use management, Long Beach has been able to cultivate a unique and diverse urban fabric. This includes quality public parks, state of the art private developments, sustainable transportation infrastructure, affordable housing, market rate housing and other components to cities that are unique to each city across the great state of California.

The City has conscientiously worked with the private sector to facilitate housing. Over the past ten years, 1,778 new affordable units have been built, 2,093 existing units have been preserved, and 367 units have been rehabilitated. Long Beach has also supported 335 first-time home buyers with silent second mortgages. With that said, developers build housing -- cities facilitate housing developments through the provision of public service such as public infrastructure and public safety services.

Long Beach recognizes that California's housing market is financially challenging for many individuals and families in our State. However the problem will not be solved by simply mandating cities [to] accommodate housing developments..."

City of LB Gov't Affairs Manager Diana Tang told LBREPORT.com in early July that the City of LB will continue to oppose SB 828 "as long as the bill proposes to use RHNA as a housing production mandate on cities."

While city management has put the City's opposition on the record, there's been no agendized public discussion by LB electeds -- the Mayor and City Council -- of SB 828.

Sponsor

On May 30, state Senator Ricardo Lara (LB-Huntington Park) -- who voted on May 25 to advance SB 828 to the Senate floor from the Senate Appropriations Committee he chairs -- stated "aye" (yes") on the Senate floor roll call vote on SB 828...but (state Senate video shows) just prior to his "yes" vote becoming final, Sen. Lara switched his vote to "no" after it became clear the bill had sufficient votes to pass. Senator Janet Nguyen (R, SE LB-west OC) -- who voted "yes" on SB 35 -- voted "no" on SB 828.

Sponsor

Sponsor

In June, the League of CA Cities (advocacy group speaking for multiple cities statewide) took a position of "oppose unless amended" on SB 828. The individual cities of Beverly Hills and Vista are also on record opposed.

The most recent legislative analysis of SB 828 can be viewed here

At the same time as SB 828 was advancing, an Assembly bill with similar but some different provisions -- AB 1771 by Assemblyman Richard Bloom (D, Santa Monica) -- was advancing in the Assembly. Its main differences are in the methodology for the regional body's (in LB's case, SCAG) calculating "housing need." On May 31, Assemblyman Patrick O'Donnell (D, LB) voted "no" on AB 1771 (which passed 48-27 with 3 not voting.)

Both SB 828 and AB 1771 are now advancing to final passage. On advancing SB 828, the Assembly Appropriations Committee deleted "a conference" re AB 1771 so it's not immediately clear if the two bills will be reconciled/amended, and one possibly dropped, before votes on final passage. There's no indication of an official City of Long Beach position on AB 1771 in Assembly or state Senate analyses of AB 1771.

Further as it develops. .

Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to incumbent Long Beach officials, development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.