ASSIGNMENT 5 COURSE 2 MSN COMPLETE.

docx

School

Lone Star College System, North Harris *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

2504

Subject

Political Science

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AdmiralIce12769

1 Access to Safe Housing Policies for People in California “MD 5 Assgn OKOH C. (extension)” WALDEN UNIVERSITY Albert Terrillion Public Health Policy, Politics and Progress 05/10/2021

2 SECTION TWO: OPTIONS ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION Options analysis The main factor causing California’s housing crisis is increasing demand and limited supply caused mainly by municipal governments. There are actions policymakers in California can take to alleviate the housing crisis that state is facing. The first is introducing laws that make the development of new denser properties, the second is avoiding the abuse of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the third is incentivizing the development of residential projects. Policymakers noticed the problem and presented bill SB 827 to legitimize taller, denser buildings near transit stops. The bill did not become law but it acted as a starting point for the conversation on how to best address the housing crisis. A modified version of the bill that addressed some of the main objections, SB 50, was brought up (Furth & Hamilton, 2020). This new bill would allow the development of 4-5 floor residential buildings close to transit stops. Although significantly lesser than the previous version, this move would become one of the biggest initiatives to solve the crisis. The new bill also looked to apply similar directives to areas with a high number of jobs, dubbed “job-rich,” meaning more residential houses close to major employers. With that, the new bill comes with several challenges. The bill comes with concessions that exclude many properties from the new density rules. Landlords will redevelop properties 7 years after tenants leave, 15 years if they were evicted. In addition, developers with concessions will have to use union labor and reserve a predetermined number of low-income earners’ units.

3 These directives add cost to any density the bill legalizes, thus greatly slowing down redevelopment. The bill allows many communities years to come up with similar plans to those it outlines. These communities will be selected by local authorities in collaboration with the California Department of Housing and given until 2025. This move further slows down development in communities deemed sensitive, and may worsen the situation. SB 50, just like all housing reforms, leaves some things to be desired but its nature as a rule that codifies a mandate that allows more density near transit stops with the highest frequency of traffic is an important step in the bid to alleviate the housing crisis. Places with adequate public transportation are likely to be seen as great candidates for higher density building than those far flung from the city center where residents prefer private transportation. As such, SB 50, with all its imperfections, will lead to more buildings and this will help solve the crisis California faces. Policymakers should ensure the bill becomes law as soon as possible (Zaiac, 2018, December 21). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is one of the major obstacles that stand in the way of housing development in the state. The act holds that local governments must do a detailed review of discretionary projects before approval. The act looks to protect the environment and human health by mandating the analysis of project impact and then ask the developers to avoid impacts that could significantly affect the environment. The issue with this act is that it is exposed to litigation since it is enforced by private litigation (Hernandez, 2018). This abuse comes about when opponents do not want density added in their area. Abusing the CEQA adds significant development cost and time. Something like the threat of litigation adds substantial cost to development as developers invest a lot of resources preparing for or defending their developments from opponents or straight up discourages them

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 from pursuing the project. Home buyers bear housing costs in the end and so adherence to the CEQA increases housing costs even if nobody challenges the project. A look at history books shows that housing prices in California started increasing significantly around the same time the state passed CEQA and community resistance to new homes got stronger (Collins, 2018, April 13). The legislative analyst’ office reports that home prices in California rose to 80% higher than the U.S average from 30% between the 70s and 80s (Legislative Analyst's Office, 2015). The CEQA is a good initiative and should not be done away with but legislators should work to ensure it is not susceptible to exploitation by malicious parties (Bertrand, 2019). The CEQA has become a loophole for anti-development individuals who use it to preserve things as they are and not necessarily for the greater good. One such action would be to restrict the power the judiciary has to invalidate approvals to only those projects that would threaten the ecology, destroy irreplaceable community resources and harm public health. Another action will be eliminating duplicate contests against projects and plans that have already completed the CEQA process. The final action will be requiring individuals filling CEQA to disclose their environmental interests and identity. Californian authorities reap different amounts of service demands and tax revenues from different developments (industrial, residential, commercial, etc). The current financial structure in the state gives authorities more incentive to approve low density housing or non-residential development. For instance, counties and cities receive significant benefits from hotels and other big retail establishments in form of revenues that cover the cost of delivering public services. On the other hand, housing projects are not direct producers of hotel tax or sales revenues and counties and cities only receive a minute portion in the form of property tax. Because of this difference in benefits, counties and cities give commercial developments incentives by offering

5 benefits and subsidies to developers the main benefit being zoning large portions of land for them (Atwater et al., 2020). Legislators should thus look for ways to make residential developments more appealing to counties and cities in the state of California. The main approach to use is increasing the revenue generated from residential developments while maintaining the property taxes as they are; incentivizing the development of projects with more units. Legislators can provide bonuses and incentives to developments that avail benefits to the community like open space or affordable housing and are located in transit zones. For instance, the development of affordable housing around transit should be given more bonuses even with the current law that offers an adjustable density bonus if new projects include affordable housing units. Legislators should augment and build on the current density bonuses which can then encourage the financial viability of a variety of projects including: a. Developments that also offer benefits to the public like better connections to transit stations, new pedestrian paths, plazas and open spaces. b. Developments that feature a large number of affordable housing units. c. Developments on underutilized or vacant spaces. d. Developments for mixed use for example commercials under residential. The main benefit of following this path is increased developments that will ease the issues of lack of housing (Infranca, 2019). The main problem is that the city will lose a significant amount of revenue as a result of the various bonuses. Recommendation

6 The course of action I would recommend is to reform the California Quality Environment Act. The best move would be to expand and build on former reforms before making big changes altogether (Chung, 2019). For instance, the 1998 exemption from review for residential developments on less than five acres, do not impact water quality, air quality, noise or traffic could be expanded to cover more land and fewer conditions. Indeed any significant development comes at a cost, and in the case of residential projects these include more traffic overtime but they avail a great overall benefit. Local resistance is one of the main issues facing development in the state, with such sects as Not in My Backyard (NIMBYs) gaining notoriety empowered by the CEQA (Werdegar, 2018). Despite the fact that reforming the CEQA would make it less able to effectively achieve the aims it was created for, including the reforms stated above would go a long way towards alleviating the housing crisis and delivering better housing to California tenants. The best way to overcome the disadvantage of reforming the CEQA as suggested above is increasing the efficiency of the environmental impact report process. Increasing efficiency will make reports more accurate and shorten the vetting period. EIRs are a crucial part of the CEQA and so making it better will overcome the shortcomings brought about by the suggestion to reform the act. Legislators should look at the necessary human and material resources to smoothen the EIR process. Takeaway The ultimate goal of any development is to avail massive benefits to that go beyond the obvious. Ensuring the SB 827 becomes law will put the public in a better health position as more residential developments near transit stops will decrease the distance to healthcare centers for more people and so more individuals will be better off from a health perspective. Higher density

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 in select areas will also give more people access to the same levels of quality healthcare and so increase health equality. The second option was regulating the CEQA and doing so will indirectly impact public health and health equity. Due to abuse, the CEQA is now one of the biggest obstacles standing in the way of more housing developments in California. By modifying the act, more housing developments will be done and so the overall quality of housing will go up which will improve public health. New developments will bring about more quality houses which means more people will have access to healthier homes and so increase overall health equity. Finally, incentivizing the development of new residential projects will bring more revenue to counties and cities and these extra resources will trickle down to the healthcare system, improving the quality of healthcare and the number of people that will benefit from the same.

8 References Atwater, P., Karlinsky, S., Lovett, J., & Silva, F. (2020). (Rep.). SPUR (San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association). Retrieved April 24, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26064 Bertrand, A. (2019). Proxy War: The Role of Recent CEQA Exemptions in Fixing California's Housing Crisis. Colum. JL & Soc. Probs. , 53 , 413. Chung, H. (2019). Moving CEQA away from Judicial Enforcement: Proposal for a Dedicated CEQA Agency to Address Exclusionary Use of CEQA. S. Cal. L. Rev. , 93 , 307. Collins, J. (2018, April 13). 5 ways to solve California’s housing crisis . The Mercury News. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/13/5-ways-to-solve-californias-housing-crisis/ Furth, S., & Hamilton, E. (2020). California Can Improve Housing and Transit by Preempting Local Ordinances. Hernandez, J. (2018). California Environmental Quality Act Lawsuits and California's Housing Crisis. Hastings Envt'l LJ , 24 , 21. Infranca, J. (2019). The new state zoning: land use preemption amid a housing crisis. BCL Rev. , 60 , 823. Legislative Analyst's Office. (2015, March 17). California’s high housing costs: Causes and consequences . Legislative Analyst's Office. https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.aspx Werdegar, K. M. (2018). The California Environmental Quality Act at 40. Cal. Legal Hist. , 13 , 3. Zaiac, N. (2018, December 21). Alleviating California’s housing crisis | Nick Zaiac . Catalyst. https://catalyst.independent.org/2018/12/18/alleviating-californias-housing-crisis/

ASSIGNMENT 5 COURSE 2 MSN COMPLETE.

Related Documents