Planning and zoning: annual report: rehabilitated units.
Impact
The legislative intent behind AB 726 is to enhance transparency and provide a clearer picture of housing stock that has received significant investment for rehabilitation. In reinforcing this stipulation, local agencies will be enabled to provide data regarding their contributions to affordable housing, while still meeting state mandates for reporting their housing developments and progress towards regional housing needs. This could lead to more comprehensive data on affordable housing conditions and improvements within California's housing landscape.
Summary
Assembly Bill 726, introduced by Assembly Member vila Faras, aims to amend Section 65400 of the Government Code concerning planning and zoning regulations. The bill facilitates local agencies in including information about deed-restricted affordable housing units that are at least 15 years old and have undergone substantial rehabilitation. Specifically, it allows these units to be reported without counting them towards affordability requirements for eligibility in streamlined approvals, thus altering how affordable housing stock is assessed in annual reports submitted by local governments.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding AB 726 appears generally supportive from housing advocates who believe that the emphasis on rehabilitated units could provide more opportunities for maintaining affordable housing stocks while simultaneously ensuring local compliance with state housing goals. However, some local governments may express concerns about accountability and whether exempting these units from certain calculations undermines their broader responsibilities in addressing housing needs.
Contention
Notably, there remains contention regarding how this legislation interacts with existing laws, particularly regarding the impacts of including certain units in annual reports but excluding them from affordability calculations. This could potentially create discrepancies in understanding the actual availability of affordable housing, which some critics argue could lead to misrepresentation of a city or county’s achievements in meeting housing requirements. Additionally, partnerships between state regulations and local planning processes could be challenged based on how they align with broader housing affordability strategies.