With the housing crisis in California reaching a critical juncture, cities across the state are desperately looking for ways to spur the building of more affordable housing.
At the recommendation of its Legislation and Litigation Committee, the Bakersfield City Council filed its support for Senate Bills 423 and 4, which would streamline the design and permit process for housing projects constructed on state-owned or leased land as well as sites owned by religious organizations, respectively.
The two bills currently reside on the Senate floor, awaiting further deliberation.
The council voted 5-2, with supporters saying the bills would ultimately spur housing development at little expense to local governments and aid the city in reaching its housing goals.
“It is a fact that our state and our city are in a housing crisis,” Ward 7 Councilwoman Manpreet Kaur said at Wednesday’s meeting. She sits on the Legislation and Litigation Committee alongside Ward 4 Councilman Bruce Freeman and Ward 2 Councilman and Vice Mayor Andrae Gonzales.
Kaur pointed out that the bills, authored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, have bipartisan support, including approval by state Sen. Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield.
“It shows we are all recognizing the affordable housing crisis we are facing,” Kaur said. Additional support came from the local Southwest Carpenters Union, whose members were in attendance Wednesday.
Other council members felt it was another example of state overreach, a sentiment echoed by city’s staff decision not to recommend support for Senate Bill 423.
The bill would extend existing law — Senate Bill 35 — that creates a streamlined process for residential projects in California counties and cities that fail to meet housing quotas set by the state.
Some took issue with this indefinite expansion, saying it paves a legal framework whereby the state can allow construction on land that can forgo local land use, planning and zoning standards. The California League of Cities in March voiced similar concerns.
“In our legislative platform, we’ve taken a pretty strong stance in support of local control,” Bakersfield City Manager Christian Clegg said. “Whenever we see bills that start to infringe upon that local control, our default has been to oppose those bills.”
Ward 3 Councilman Ken Weir, with sentiments echoed by Ward 6 Councilwoman Patty Gray, said it “was time to take a stand” against the powers-that-be in Sacramento.
“We’re being put in an untenable situation,” Weir said. “…We’re losing our housing rights and I think at some point in time, we have to make a stand, and tonight’s the night for me,” said Weir, who made a motion to reject support for the bill.
Ultimately, officials said, the state owns a “sliver” of land in Bakersfield beyond the state highways and the medians in between, so the few units that could be built are seemingly harmless.
“We’re only talking about a tiny number of potential projects,” Freeman said. “State-owned land, church-owned land — a very, very tiny number, and for that reason, I don’t feel we have a huge threat here of losing local control.”
Many California cities have failed to meet housing quotas outlined in their Regional Housing Needs Allocation, a state-made compilation that recommends many localities double their housing production to stave off an already dangerously high cost of living. According to language in SB 423, all but 29 of the cities and counties in California have failed to generate enough units set by their allocation goals.
“I think building more housing, more affordable housing, in the state of California, as soon as possible, is paramount,” Gonzales said. “The reality is, and what has been discussed on this dais and in council chambers throughout the state, is that there is simply not enough affordable housing.”
Bakersfield, which has consistently fallen well below the mark, needs to build 37,461 units by the end of 2031. That means the city needs to approve 4,600 homes annually, including 2,277 low-income, affordable housing units. The closest the city came to that in recent history was 2021, when it approved 2,552 new permits, the most in a decade. The city approved 1,150 last year.
“As you know, I like to win,” Christoper Boyle, the city’s director of development services, told the council Wednesday. “So my statement will be that we will one day meet our 37,461-unit requirement. … I’m trying really hard to meet our (RHNA). Have we ever (met it)? No.”
Another concern, Boyle said — with a preface that he can be an alarmist — is that this extension of SB 35 could, down the road, create a scenario where cities that don’t meet their housing numbers lose certification for their Housing Element Plan. What does that mean? A potential freeze on all state housing grants.
“The bill stops short of saying a failure to meet these numbers results in decertification of the city’s housing element, but it came right to its doorstep,” Boyle said.
Officials expressed frustration that, despite the state’s best intentions, the market is what builds housing. Not the government. But while the bills may present future legal challenges, at large it simply allows for more housing at a quicker rate.
Freeman on Wednesday took a different angle, comparing it all to a tiny experiment.
“I’d really love to see some creativity allowed, because if we don’t break the mold, we will never see any new innovation in housing that brings cost down,” Freeman said. “…maybe we’ll see something interesting come out of the box.”
Click Here For This Articles Original Source.
