HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 1, 2013 C-26AGENDA ITEM Co .0Z1+
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
• TM
AGENDA TITLE: Authorize the Mayor, on Behalf of the City Council, to Send a Letter
of Support for AB 1229 (Atkins) and a Letter of Opposition to AB 325 (Alejo)
MEETING DATE: May 1, 2013
PREPARED BY: City Clerk
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor, on behalf of the City Council, to send a letter
of support for AB 1229 (Atkins) and a letter of opposition to AB 325
(Alejo).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On April 18, 2013, the City received a request from the League of
California Cities to support AB 1229 (Atkins) and oppose AB 325
(Alejo).
In regards to AB 1229, the Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any city or county
to adopt ordinances regulating zoning within its jurisdiction. This bill would additionally authorize the
legislative body of any city or county to adopt ordinances to establish, as a condition of development,
inclusionary housing requirements and would declare the intent of the Legislature in adding this
provision.
In regards to AB 325, the Planning and Zoning Law requires an action or proceeding against local zoning
and planning decisions of a legislative body to be commenced and the legislative body to be served
within a one year of accrual of the cause of action. When the action or proceeding is brought in
connection with the development of housing increasing the community's supply of affordable housing, a
cause of action accrues 60 days after notice is filed or the legislative body takes a final action in response
to the notice, whichever occurs first. This bill would authorize the notice to be filed any time within 3 years
after a specified action pursuant to existing law.
For the reasons stated above and in the attached draft correspondence, it is recommended that the City
Council authorize the execution and delivery of the proposed correspondence.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Not applicable at this time.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable at this time.
Randi Joh
City Clerk
0I1"D
Bartlam, City Manager
Randi Johl
From: Randi Johl
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2013 02:38 PM
To: Randi Johl
Subject: FW: Letters needed
Attachments: AB 325 (Alejo) Action Alert 041513 (2).pdf; AB 325 Sample Letter.doc; AB 1229 (Atkins)
Action Alert 041113b.docx; AB 1229 Sample support letter-FINAL.doc
A use
AB 325 (Alejo) AB 325 Sample AB 1229 (Atkins) AB 1229 Sample
Action Alert 04... Letter.doc (31 K... Action Alert ... support letter-...
-----Original Message -----
From: Stephen R. Qualls (mailto:squalls@cacities.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 09:44 AM
Subject: Letters needed
Attached you will please find letters concerning AB 325 and AB 1229.
AB 325 (oppose), extends the statute of limitation for challenging certain housing or
planning decisions. The current statute of limitations of 1 year and 150 days already
exceeds the 90 days allowed for other planning decisions.
AB 1229 (support), returns the decision making process for inclusionary housing to local
government. But this shouldn't be of concern only to those cities that have inclusionary
housing elements. This should concern every city as it is a conduit to return local
control to local government. Something that has been eroded lately by the Legislature in
Sacramento.
These both need to be sent as soon as possible because AB 1229 is to be heard on May 17th
and AB 325 on May 30th.
Please cc me when you send the letters.
Thank you for your support,
Stephen Qualls
Central Valley Regional Public Affairs Manager
League of California Cities
209-614-0118
Fax 209-883-0653
squalls@cacities.org<mailto:squalls@cacities.org>
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and
advocacy in order to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
<http://www.cacities.org/AC>
PLEASE DO NOT distribute political campaign advocacy information from public (city hall)
computers, on city time, or using public resources, even if it's from your personal email
account. If in doubt, check with your city attorney.
***Disclaimer***Please Note: Please take the following precautions if this email is about
a CITIPAC event. Though it is not illegal for you to receive this notice via a city e-
mail address, you should not respond to it or forward it using public resources. You may
however forward this message to your non-public e-mail account for distribution on non-
public time. If you have questions about the event or need additional information, please
contact Mike Egan at (916) 658-8271 or egan@cacities.org
1
CITY COUNCIL
ALAN NAKANISHI, Mayor
PHIL KATZAKIAN,
Mayor Pro Tempore
LARRY D. HANSEN
BOB JOHNSON
JOANNE MOUNCE
May 1, 2013
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(209) 333-6702 / FAX (209) 333-6807
www.lodi.gov citvclerk aalodi.gov
The Honorable Norma Torres
Chair, Housing and Community Development Committee
California State Assembly
State Capitol Building, Room 2179
Sacramento, California 95814
Via Facsimile: (916) 319-2152
SUBJECT:
Limitations. NOTICE OF
Dear Assembly Member Torres:
The City of Lodi has taken a position of oppose on
of limitations to file suit against a city's housing ele
KONRADT BARTLAM,
City Manager
RANDI JOHL, City Clerk
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
City Attorney
would expan.,''the statute
Jr years.
Government Code Section 65009 state that legal action adit"s a city or county "has a
chilling effect on the confidence with which j5t6 11 owners an l ocgJ,°governments can
w
proceed with projects. In addition, The purpos o wthts section i§A provide certainty for
property owners and local governments regarding decxsOOns, meld pursuant to this division.
Expanding the statute of limitations goes again sttheve rypurpose of this section with which
this bill seeks to amend 4,°"'*"�- �.:.:s..., Q
AB 325 is an attem`ktt`4expand the current statute of>limitations without regard to whether a
city's housing element follows the;lettter of the law�ar a jurisdiction fails to adopt a housing
element entirely Our city hasiNorked hac to mtieet the state s statutory housing
requirements The pS�bility oaulawsuit looirttng over our head for over four years would
have a tatingeffect Qn dei , opment and our local economy.
For#hese4 easons, the CiW.,," a. Lodi his an oppose position on AB 325.
Sincerely,
Alan Nakanishi
Mayor
C: Anya Lawler, Consultant, Assembly Housing and Community Development
Committee (916-319-3182)
William Weber, Consultant, Assembly Republican Caucus (916-319-3902)
Kirstin Kolpitcke, League of California Cities
Stephen Qualls, League of California Cities
CITY COUNCIL
ALAN NAKANISHI, Mayor
PHIL KATZAKIAN,
Mayor Pro Tempore
LARRY D. HANSEN
BOBJOHNSON
JOANNE MOUNCE
May 1, 2013
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(209) 333-6702 / FAX (209) 333-6807
www.lodi.gov cityc[erk@lodi.gov
The Honorable Toni G. Atkins
Member, California State Assembly
State Capitol Building, Room 319
Sacramento, California 95814
Via Facsimile: (916) 319-2178
SUBJECT: AB 1229 (Atkins). Lanc
NOTICE OF SUPPORT
Dear Assembly Member Atkins:
The City of Lodi is pleased to support your
authority for inclusionary housing.
In the appellate court decision, Palmer
Angeles, 175 Cal. App. 4th 1396 (2009) 1
Costa -Hawkins Act and its application or
inclusionary housing ordinances with reg
preempted by the Costa -Hawkins Act. C
of rent control, not precJuceCett,restrictit
Inclusionary housirfg`j
homes for working far
to be severely-.diminis
For thes6 reasons,
Alan Nakanishi
Mayor
ms qre an impo
uld restore
KONRADT BARTLAM,
City Manager
RAND[ JOHL, City Clerk
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
City Attorney
zoning
Street Prope�`te�s L.P. v. City of Los
,ourts took a ve .,road interpretation of the
lupnary housingxartlinances, opining that
to �rynitalMousing conflicted with and were
r-Hawkinsves intended to restrict systems
n inclusionary housing.
in the production of affordable new
affordable housing stock continues
of Lbdi,.surrworts AB 1229.
C: Anya Lawler, Consultant, Assembly Housing and Community Development
Committee (916-319-3182)
William Weber, Consultant, Assembly Republican Caucus (916-319-3902)
Kirstin Kolpitcke, League of California Cities
Stephen Qualls, League of California Cities
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE -2013-14 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 325
Introduced by Assembly Member Alejo
February 13, 2013
An act to amend Sections 65009, 65589.3, and 65755 of the
Government Code, relating to land use.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 325, as introduced, Alejo. Land use and planning: cause of
actions: time limitations.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires an action or proceeding
against local zoning and planning decisions of a legislative body to be
commenced and the legislative body to be served within a year of accrual
of the cause of action, if it meets certain requirements. Where the action
or proceeding is brought in support of or to encourage or facilitate the
development of housing that would increase the community's supply
of affordable housing, a cause of action accrues 60 days after notice is
filed or the legislative body takes a final action in response to the notice,
whichever occurs first.
This bill would authorize the notice to be filed any time within 3 years
after a specified action pursuant to existing law. The bill would declare
the intent of the Legislature that its provisions modify a specified court
opinion. The bill would also provide that in that specified action or
proceeding, no remedy pursuant to specified provisions of law abrogate,
impair, or otherwise interfere with the full exercise of the rights and
protections granted to a tentative map application or a developer, as
prescribed.
(2) The Planning and Zoning Law establishes a rebuttable
presumption, in any action filed on or after January 1, 1991, taken to
99
AB 325 —2—
challenge
2
challenge the validity of a housing element, of the validity of a housing
element or amendment if the Department of Housing and Community
Development has found that the element or amendment substantially
complies with specified provisions of existing law.
This bill would provide in any action brought against a city, county,
or city and county to challenge the adequacy of a housing element, if
a court finds that the adopted housing element or amended housing
element for the current planning period substantially complies with
specified provisions, that the element or amendment be deemed to
satisfy any condition of a state -administered housing grant program
requiring a department finding of housing element compliance.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State -mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting
2 Section 2 of this act to modify the court's opinion in Urban Habitat
3 Program v. City of Pleasanton (2008)164 Ca1.App.4th 1561, with
4 respect to the interpretation of Section 65009 of the Government
5 Code.
6 SEC. 2. Section 65009 of the Government Code is amended
7 to read:
8 65009. (a) (1) The Legislature finds and declares that there
9 currently is a housing crisis in California and it is essential to
10 reduce delays and restraints upon expeditiously completing housing
11 projects.
12 (2) The Legislature further finds and declares that a legal action
13 or proceeding challenging a decision of a city, county, or city and
14 county has a chilling effect on the confidence with which property
15 owners and local governments can proceed with projects. Legal
16 actions or proceedings filed to attack, review, set aside, void, or
17 annul a decision of a city, county, or city and county pursuant to
18 this division, including, but not limited to, the implementation of
19 general plan goals and policies that provide incentives for
20 affordable housing, open -space and recreational opportunities, and
21 other related public benefits, can prevent the completion of needed
22 developments even though the projects have received required
23 governmental approvals.
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
— 3 — AB 325
(3) The purpose of this section is to provide certainty for
property owners and local governments regarding decisions made
pursuant to this division.
(b) (1) In an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside,
void, or annul a finding, determination, or decision of a public
agency made pursuant to this title at a properly noticed public
hearing, the issues raised shall be limited to those raised in the
public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the public
agency prior to, or at, the public hearing, except where the court
finds either of the following:
(A) The issue could not have been raised at the public hearing
by persons exercising reasonable diligence.
(B) The body conducting the public hearing prevented the issue
from being raised at the public hearing.
(2) If a public agency desires the provisions of this subdivision
to apply to a matter, it shall include in any public notice issued
pursuant to this title a notice substantially stating all of the
following: "If you challenge the (nature of the proposed action)
in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,
or in written correspondence delivered to the (public entity
conducting the hearing) at, or prior to, the public hearing."
(3) The application of this subdivision to causes of action
brought pursuant to subdivision (d) applies only to the final action
taken in response to the notice to the city or clerk of the board of
supervisors. If no final action is taken, then the issue raised in the
cause of action brought pursuant to subdivision (d) shall be limited
to those matters presented at a properly noticed public hearing or
to those matters specified in the notice given to the city or clerk
of the board of supervisors pursuant to subdivision (d), or both.
(c) (1) Except as provided in subdivision (d), no action or
proceeding shall be maintained in any of the following cases by
any person unless the action or proceeding is commenced and
service is made on the legislative body within 90 days after the
legislative body's decision:
(A) To attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of
a legislative body to adopt or amend a general or specific plan.
This paragraph does not apply where an action is brought based
upon the complete absence of a general plan or a mandatory
99
AB 325
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
—4—
element thereof, but does apply to an action attacking a general
plan or mandatory element thereof on the basis that it is inadequate.
(B) To attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of
a legislative body to adopt or amend a zoning ordinance.
(C) To determine the reasonableness, legality, or validity of any
decision to adopt or amend any regulation attached to a specific
plan.
(D) To attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of
a legislative body to adopt, amend, or modify a development
agreement. An action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside,
void, or annul the decisions of a legislative body to adopt, amend,
or modify a development agreement shall only extend to the
specific portion of the development agreement that is the subject
of the adoption, amendment, or modification. This paragraph
applies to development agreements, amendments, and
modifications adopted on or after January 1, 1996.
(E) To attack, review, set aside, void, or annul any decision on
the matters listed in Sections 65901 and 65903, or to determine
the reasonableness, legality, or validity of any condition attached
to a variance, conditional use permit, or any other permit.
(F) Concerning any of the proceedings, acts, or determinations
taken, done, or made prior to any of the decisions listed in
subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), (D), and (E).
(2) In the case of an action or proceeding challenging the
adoption or revision of a housing element pursuant to this
subdivision, the action or proceeding may, in addition, be
maintained if it is commenced and service is made on the
legislative body within 60 days following the date that the
Department of Housing and Community Development reports its
findings pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 65585.
(d) (1) An action or proceeding shall be commenced and the
legislative body served within one year after the accrual of the
cause of action as provided in thissubdivision,, subdivision if the
action or proceeding meets both of the following requirements:
( It is brought in support of or to encourage or facilitate the
development of housing that would increase the community's
supply of housing affordable to persons and families with low or
moderate incomes, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health
and Safety Code, or with very low incomes, as defined in Section
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
— 5 — AB 325
50105 of the Health and Safety Code, or middle-income
households, as defined in Section 65008 of this code. This
subdivision is not intended to require that the action or proceeding
be brought in support of or to encourage or facilitate a specific
housing development project.
(B) It is brought with respect to actions taken pursuant to Article
10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter
division, pursuant to 3, Section 6Jo� , 65863.6,–X5915,, or
66474.2 or pursuant to Chapter 4.2 (commencing with Section
65913). 65913), or to challenge the adequacy of an ordinance
adopted pursuant to Section 65915.
A
(2) A cause of action brought pursuant to this subdivision shall
not be maintained until 60 days have expired following notice to
the city or clerk of the board of supervisors by the party bringing
the cause of action, or his or her representative, specifying the
deficiencies of the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance.
A cause of action brought pursuant to this subdivision shall accrue
60 days after notice is filed or the legislative body takes a final
action in response to the notice, whichever occurs first. This notice
may be filed at any time within three years after an action
described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1). A notice or cause
of action brought by one party pursuant to this subdivision shall
not bar filing of a notice and initiation of a cause of action by any
other parry.
(3) After the adoption of a housing element covering the current
planning period, no action shall be filed pursuant to this
subdivision to challenge a housing element covering a prior
planning period.
(e) Upon the expiration of the time limits provided for in this
section, all persons are barred from any further action or
proceeding.
(f) Notwithstanding Sections 65700 and 65803, or any other
provision of law, this section shall apply to charter cities.
(g) Except as provided in subdivision (d), this section shall not
affect any law prescribing or authorizing a shorter period of
limitation than that specified herein.
(h) Except as provided in paragraph (4) of subdivision (c), this
section shall be applicable to those decisions of the legislative
99
AB 325
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
—6—
body of a city, county, or city and county made pursuant to this
division on or after January 1, 1984.
SEC. 3. Section 65589.3 of the Government Code is amended
to read:
65589.3. (a) In any action filed on or after January 1, 1991,
taken to challenge the validity of a housing element, there shall
be a rebuttable presumption of the validity of the element or
amendment if, pursuant to Section 65585, the department has found
that the element or amendment substantially complies with the
requirements of this article.
(b) In any action brought against a city, county, or city and
county to challenge the adequacy of a housing element, if a court
finds that the adopted housing element or amended housing element
for the current planning period substantially complies with all of
the requirements of this article, including, but not limited to, the
requirements for public participation set forth in paragraph (7)
of subdivision (c) of Section 65583, the element or amendment
shall be deemed to satisfy any condition of a state -administered
housing grant program requiring a department finding that the
housing element substantially complies with the requirements of
this article.
SEC. 4. Section 65755 of the Government Code is amended
to read:
65755. (a) The court shall include, in the order or judgment
rendered pursuant to Section 65754, one or more of the following
provisions for any or all types or classes of developments or any
or all geographic segments of the city, county, or city and county
until the city, county, or city and county has substantially complied
with the requirements of Article 5 (commencing with Section
65300):
(1) Suspend the authority of the city, county, or city and county
pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 179 10) of the
Health and Safety Code, to issue building permits, or any category
of building permits, and all other related permits, except that the
city, county, or city and county shall continue to function as an
enforcement agency for review of permit applications for
appropriate codes and standards compliance, prior to the issuance
of building permits and other related permits for residential housing
for that city, county, or city and county.
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
'1— AB 325
(2) Suspend the authority of the city, county, or city and county,
pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 65800) to grant
any and all categories of zoning changes, variances, or both.
(3) Suspend the authority of the city, county, or city and county,
pursuant to Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410), to grant
subdivision map approvals for any and all categories of subdivision
map approvals.
(4) Mandate the approval of all applications for building permits,
or other related construction permits, for residential housing where
a final subdivision map, parcel map, or plot plan has been approved
for the project, where the approval will not impact on the ability
of the city, county, or city and county to properly adopt and
implement an adequate housing element, and where the permit
application conforms to all code requirements and other applicable
provisions of law except those zoning laws held to be invalid by
the final court order, and changes to the zoning ordinances adopted
after such final court order which were enacted for the purpose of
preventing the construction of a specific residential development.
(5) Mandate the approval of any or all final subdivision maps
for residential housing projects which have previously received a
tentative map approval from the city, county, or city and county
pursuant to Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) when
the final map conforms to the approved tentative map, the tentative
map has not expired, and where approval will not impact on the
ability of the city, county, or city and county to properly adopt and
implement an adequate housing element.
(6) Mandate that notwithstanding the provisions of Sections
66473.5 and 66474, any tentative subdivision map for a residential
housing project shall be approved if all of the following
requirements are met:
(A) The approval of the map will not significantly impair the
ability of the city, county, or city and county to adopt and
implement those elements or portions thereof of the general plan
which have been held to be inadequate.
(B) The map complies with all of the provisions of Division 2
(commencing with Section 66410), except those parts which would
require disapproval of the project due to the inadequacy of the
general plan.
99
AB 325
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
8—
(C) The approval of the map will not affect the ability of the
city, county, or city and county to adopt and implement an adequate
housing element.
(D) The map is consistent with the portions of the general plan
not found inadequate and the proposed revisions, if applicable, to
the part of the plan held inadequate.
(b) Any order or judgment of a court which includes the
remedies described in paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a)
shall exclude from the operation of that order or judgment any
action, program, or project required by law to be consistent with
a general or specific plan if the court finds that the approval or
undertaking of the action, program, or project complies with both
of the following requirements:
(1) That it will not significantly impair the ability of the city,
county, or city and county to adopt or amend all or part of the
applicable plan as may be necessary to make the plan substantially
comply with the requirements of Article 5 (commencing with
Section 65300) in the case of a general plan, or Article 8
(commencing with Section 65450) in the case of a specific plan.
(2) That it is consistent with those portions of the plan
challenged in the action or proceeding and found by the court to
substantially comply with applicable provisions of law.
The party seeking exclusion from any order or judgment of a
court pursuant to this subdivision shall have the burden of showing
that the action, program, or project complies with paragraphs (1)
and (2).
(c) Notwithstanding Section 65754.4 or subdivisions (a) and
(b), in any action or proceeding brought pursuant to subdivision
(d) of Section 65009, no remedy pursuant to this section or
injunction pursuant to Section 65754.5 shall abrogate, impair, or
otherwise interfere with the full exercise of the rights and
protections granted to (1) an applicant for a tentative map pursuant
to Section 664 74.2, or (2) a developer pursuant to Sections 65866
and 66498.1.
0
99
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE -2013-14 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1229
Introduced by Assembly Member Atkins
(Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Mullin)
(Principal coauthor: Senator Leno)
February 22, 2013
An act to amend Section 65850 of the Government Code, relating to
land use.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1229, as introduced, Atkins. Land use: zoning regulations.
The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes the legislative body of any
city or county to adopt ordinances regulating zoning within its
jurisdiction, as specified.
This bill would additionally authorize the legislative body of any city
or county to adopt ordinances to establish, as a condition of
development, inclusionary housing requirements, as specified, and
would declare the intent of the Legislature in adding this provision. The
bill would also make a technical, nonsubstantive change.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State -mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
1 SECTION 1. Section 65850 of the Government Code is
2 amended to read:
3 65850. The legislative body of any county or city may, pursuant
4 to this chapter, adopt ordinances that do any of the following:
99
AB 1229
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
—2—
(a) Regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between
industry, business, residences, open space, including agriculture,
recreation, enjoyment of scenic beauty, use of natural resources,
and other purposes.
(b) Regulate signs and billboards.
(c) Regulate all of the following:
(1) The location, height, bulk, number of stories, and size of
buildings and structures.
(2) The size and use of lots, yards, courts, and other open spaces.
(3) The percentage of a lot which may be occupied by a building
or structure.
(4) The intensity of land use.
(d) Establish requirements for-e€€kfeet off-street parking and
loading.
(e) Establish and maintain building setback lines.
(f) Create civic districts around civic centers, public parks,
public buildings, or public grounds, and establish regulations for
those civic districts.
(g) Establish, as a condition of development, inclusionary
housing requirements, which may require the provision of
residential units affordable to, and occupied by, owners or tenants
whose household incomes do not exceed the limits for lower
income, very low income, or extremely low income households
specified in Sections 50079.5, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and
Safety Code.
SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Inclusionary housing ordinances have provided quality
affordable housing to over 80,000 Californians, including the
production of an estimated 30,000 units of affordable housing in
the last decade alone.
(b) Since the 1970s, over 170 jurisdictions have enacted
inclusionary housing ordinances to meet their affordable housing
needs.
(c) While many of these local programs have been in place for
decades, the recent decision in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P.
v. City of Los Angeles (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 1396, has created
uncertainty and confusion for local governments regarding the
future viability of this important local land use tool.
(d) It is the intent of the Legislature to reaffirm the authority of
local jurisdictions to enact and enforce these ordinances.
99
— 3 — AB 1229
1 (e) The Legislature declares its intent in adding subdivision (g)
2 to Section 65850 of the Government Code, pursuant to Section 1
3 of this act, to supersede any holding or dicta in Palmer/Sixth Street
4 Properties, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2009) 175 Cal.AppAth
5 1396, to the extent that the opinion in that case conflicts with that
6 subdivision. This act shall not otherwise be construed to enlarge
7 or diminish the authority of a jurisdiction beyond those powers
8 that existed as of July 21, 2009.
0
M