Regional housing need: determination: consultation with councils of governments.
Impact
The ramifications of SB 233 are significant for local governments and their capacity to plan for housing in their jurisdictions. By dictating the timeframe for consultations, the bill seeks to ensure that regional needs are thoroughly evaluated well in advance of any housing element revisions. This structured approach aims to enhance the accuracy and reliability of housing projections, which are critical for local jurisdictions in long-term planning. However, the increased consultation period may also place additional burdens on both state and local agencies as they strive to meet the new timelines.
Summary
Senate Bill 233, introduced by Senator Seyarto, aims to amend Section 65584.01 of the Government Code related to regional housing needs determination. The bill emphasizes the necessity of consultations between the California Department of Housing and Community Development and councils of governments with regards to assessing the existing and projected housing needs of various regions. A key feature of the bill is the adjusted timelines for consultations, mandating that the department consult with councils of governments at least 38 months prior to the scheduled revision for the 7th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, extending the previous 26 months requirement.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 233 appears generally supportive, particularly among legislators concerned about the adequacy of housing plans across California. Proponents argue that the bill will foster better planning and address the pressing housing shortages by ensuring comprehensive input from relevant local authorities. Nonetheless, there are concerns among some local officials regarding the feasibility of adhering to the extended consultation deadlines and whether they will have sufficient resources to comply with the new requirements.
Contention
Notable points of contention include the challenges local governments may face in adjusting to the new regulations set forth by the bill. Critics fear that while the intention is to improve housing availability, the practical implications of extended timelines for consultations could delay necessary housing developments, especially in regions already struggling with housing shortages. Moreover, the potential for disputes between departments regarding the methodology used for projections may lead to further complications in achieving consensus on local housing needs.