Editorial: Why retreat on affordable housing ordinance?
County wins in court, yet supervisors settle with building industry. What gives?
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, August 5, 2007
Story appeared in FORUM section, Page E6
Story appeared in FORUM section, Page E6
Sacramento County's affordable housing ordinance, approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2004, was the product of months of open hearings and reviews.
Because of that ordinance, more than 4,000 homes and rental units are now in the pipeline to house people who make far less than the area's median income. Those residences, and others to follow, will provide vital shelter for thousands of people and families who could otherwise become homeless or be forced into overcrowded and dangerous conditions.
The building industry challenged this ordinance in court and lost the first round. That would suggest the county is on strong legal footing with its requirement that 15 percent of any new development provide for affordable housing.
Yet for dubious reasons, a new majority on the Board of Supervisors has been negotiating a settlement with the building industry to revise this landmark ordinance. Housing advocates, who helped craft the original law, were excluded from these talks and only recently have seen details of the settlement proposal. What they've seen gives them great fear that supervisors are preparing to rush through changes that undermine the goals of the 2004 ordinance.
Under this law, 6 percent of the units in new residential development must be affordable to people making less than 80 percent of the area's median income -- about $48,440 annually for a family of three. Six percent must be reserved for households that make less than half of the median income and 3 percent must be reserved for extremely low-income households, those making less than $18,150.
Developers can meet this requirement in a variety of ways. They can build the affordable units themselves, or they can dedicate land for the housing and pay fees that would result in the required construction.
The requirement for extremely low-income units has long been a sticking point for developers, who complain that they (and their market-rate customers) are being forced to provide an excessive subsidy. The county's proposed settlement would shift the cost for these units to the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Authority, which may or may not have the needed funding to build the required units.
The settlement also proposes to allow developers to gain credits if they build more than the specified affordable units in a development. They could then apply these "credits" elsewhere in a planning area to meet the law's requirements. Housing advocates rightly fear this could result in affordable units being segregated in a single neighborhood, instead of being spread out through a new community.
Supervisors plan to hold their first hearing Wednesday on the settlement proposal. It shouldn't be their last. Housing advocates are unconvinced that supervisors have struck this deal simply to limit the county's legal risks, as supervisors claim. They question if the clout (and campaign contributions) of the building industry has influenced both the process and the outcome.
Because of their actions of recent months, the supervisors face a burden of convincing doubters their proposal is just a starting point for discussions instead of a done deal. Wednesday will be a chance to gain back some of the public confidence they have lost. Many residents will be watching.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment