LBReport.com

News / Detailed Coverage

Councilmembers Richardson & Pearce Vote To Require So Cal Coastal Areas (Instead of Inland Areas) To Absorb Increased Share Of New Housing, SCAG Vote Calls For Finding/Zoning/Enabling LB Locations For 26,440 New Housing Units b/w 2021-29; New LB LUE Includes "Opportunities" For 28.5k


If LBREPORT.com didn't tell you,
who would?
No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to 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. Support 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.
The following announcement text is provided by the Long Beach City Clerk's office.

City Clerk Calls for Argument Writers for the 2020 City Ballot Measures

On March 3, 2020, the City of Long Beach will hold a Consolidated Municipal Election with the Statewide Direct Primary Election at which voters will consider a ballot measure relating to the Measure A Extension Transactions and Use (Sales) Tax and subject to Council action on November 19, 2019, may consider a ballot measure relating to the City of Long Beach Transient Occupancy (Hotel Bed Tax) Measure.

To make sure there is adequate time for those interested in writing arguments for or against the measure, the Interest Form for Argument Writers is available starting Nov. 15 on the Office of the City Clerk webpage www.longbeach.gov/cityclerk/elections/ballot-measures. All interest forms must be received by the City Clerk at 411 West Ocean Boulevard, Lobby Level, Window #12, Long Beach, CA 90802, no later than 4:30 p.m. on Friday, November 22, 2019. A separate form must be submitted for each ballot measure.

The Mayor will announce his nominees for argument writers at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, November 25, 2019. The City Council will vote on those nominations at the City Council meeting on December 3, 2019.

Arguments FOR or AGAINST the ballot measure are due to the City Clerk by Friday, December 13, 2019 at 4:30 p.m., while rebuttal arguments are due by Monday, December 23, 2019 at 4:30 p.m. Arguments must not exceed 300 words and rebuttal arguments must not exceed 250 words.

For more information, please contact the Office of the City Clerk, at (562) 570-6101.

Preceding text provided by Long Beach City Clerk's office.
(November 14, 2019, 11:35 p.m., updated witgh add'l and amended text on Nov. 16, 9:10 a.m.) -- In a dramatic shift away from previous housing planning scenarios, the Southern CA Association of Governments' (SCAG) Regional Council has voted 43-19 -- with LB's two SCAG representatives Councilmembers Rex Richardson and Jeannine Pearce both voting "yes" -- to require southern California coastal areas (instead of inland areas) to absorb a significantly increased share of new housing units between 2021 and 2029.

In a Nov. 7 vote, SCAG's policy setting body voted to approve a Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA) methodology that would require So Cal coastal cities to plan for, enable development of and ultimately bear the traffic, infrastructure and local government resource burdens of new housing in an amount more than three times greater than SCAG approved less than a decade ago. The motion by Riverside Mayor Rusty Bailey, favored by inland area cities and accepted by the City of Los Angeles with the inclusion of possible future "clarifications" (tweaks in methodology) that could affect the number of new housing units required in L.A., was approved over the objections of some coastal area cities.

If not tweaked or further changed, SCAG's new draft RHNA methodology would require the City of Long Beach -- through voted actions of current and/or future LB City Councilmembers -- to plan for and enable land use and zoning allowing 26,440 new housing units at currently unspecified locations in Long Beach between 2021 and 2029 (including a "affordable"/below market subsidized units for low/very low income residents.)

However for LB, part of that battle has already been fought and decided in the stormy process leading to the City Council's 2018 voted approval (EIR now pending) of a draft updated Land Use Element with maps and text that [LUE text says] create the "opportunity for 28,524 housing units both to accommodate population growth and to address overcrowding of existing Long Beach households."

The 26,440 number for new LB housing units wasn't in dispute on the Nov. 7 SCAG vote; the same figure appeared in both the inland-cities and SCAG staff methodologies...but SCAG's vote alloocate housing increases to a number of nearby cities beyond what SCAG staff had initially proposed.

Under SCAG's Nov. 7 vote, Lakewood could be required to plan/enable 3,952 new housing units. Los Angeles would have to enable 463,682 more housing units. In OC, Huntington Beach would have to approve/enable 13,321 new housing units. Garden Grove was assigned 19,252 new housing units. And Costa Mesa was told to plan/enable 11,734 new housing units. Proponents say increasing the supply of housing will meet demand and reduce housing costs in coastal areas near jobs and transit. At the same time, current residents and elected officials will have to contend with the resulting increased traffic, infrastructure and government resource impacts.

Subject to some possible revisions, the Nov. 7 SCAG-adopted draft RHNA methodology would result in housing allocations (2021-29) for So. Cal cities detailed at this link.)

[Scroll down for further.]








Proponents of shifting planned new housing from inland areas to coastal areas argued it would put new housing nearer transit and jobs, reduce lengthy commutes and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But apart from policy discussions, the SCAG vote ultimately came down to numbers; SCAG representatives of inland area outnumber SCAG reps from coastal areas; the resulting vote -- on which SCAG reps Councilmembers Richardson (elected to SCAG in a multi-city selection process) and Pearce both voted "yes" -- pushed most of the region's new housing need out of inland areas and into coastal areas.

Sponsor

Sponsor

Background

On Aug. 22, 2019, CA's Department of Housing and Development sent SCAG a "determination" letter stating that the So Cal region "needs" 1,344,740 housing units from 2021-29 of which roughly 41% (557,336) should be for low-income or very low-income residents. (Sac'to's new RHNA determination more than triples the 438,030 units forecast as "needed" for 2014-2021.)

In response, SCAG (by a vote of its Regional Council) objected to Sac'to's numbers and sent the Sac'to agency a lengthy and technically complex objection letter dated Sept. 18, 2019. SCAG's November 7, 2019 Regional Council vote now sends its draft RHNA methodology to the same Sacramento agency for review and approval that produced the regional housing needs figure to which SCAG objected.

If/when SCAG receives approval from the Sac'to agency (due within roughly 60 days), SCAG can finalize and apply its new RHNA figures to regionally. Cities that refuse to comply could lose state transportation funding or face other financial or legal sanctions if they fail to allow/zone sufficient areas to accommodate their SCAG-assigned share of the region's housing "need."

Sponsor

Sponsor

SCAG's new RHNA numbers carry new clout under recently enacted Sacramento legislation that variously give housing developers (particularly those offering to build "affordable"/subsidized housing units) the ability to diminish or override locally-enacted neighborhood protective zoning and density/land use policies. Although LB's City Council annually adopts a state "legislative agenda" reciting that the City will oppose legislation that reduces the local control, the City of Long Beach took no position (remained neutral) as multiple locally-preemptive Sacramento housing bills advanced to passage. In various ways, the bills limit (and in some cases erase) the ability of neighborhood residents to appeal the impacts of new housing developments and reduce (and in some cases erase) the ability of city officials to apply City Council-enacted zoning, land use, and parking requirements to new housing developments.

Sponsor


Although cities governed by City Charters (such as Long Beach) have traditionally had the ability to decide city matters such as land use and zoning, Sacramento's recently enacted housing bills include verbiage stating that the bills apply to Charter governed cities because housing issues are matters of statewide concern. Thus far, Long Beach hasn't joined some other Charter cities in challenging the Sacramento bills' locally preemptive verbiage.

In early 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom publicly endorsed state legal action against the City of Huntington Beach, contending that its City Council had deliberately reduced the availability of locations to accommodate new housing. (Huntington Beach denies it acted improperly and has separately filed suit challenging Sacramento's actions.) Earlier this year, Mayor Garcia (who doesn't set city policy) publicly indicated that he supports Gov. Newsom's stance. LB's policy-setting City Council hasn't publicly agendized the matter for discussion.

Sponsor

Sponsor

Nov. 16, 9:10 a.m.: Text added noting that new draft LUE (EIR now pending) creates the "opportunity for 28,524 housing units both to accommodate population growth and to address overcrowding of existing Long Beach households" and headline amended consistent with this. Text updated to note that Councilman Richardson was elected as LB-area SCAG rep in a multi-city selection process.


Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to 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.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:


Follow LBReport.com with:

Twitter

Facebook

RSS

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com



Adoptable pet of the week:



Carter Wood Floors
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050


Copyright © 2019 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here