CC - Item 6C - Resolution No. 2021-51 - Expressing Support for Actions to Further Strengthen Local Democracy, Authority and Control as Related to Local Zoning and Housing Issues E M �
5
ct.
O '9
`~ ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
y�
. CIVIC PRIDE STAFF REPORT
14C0RPORATE0 Ace
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GLORIA MOLLEDA, CITY MANAGER. NA .
DATE: DECEMBER 8, 2020
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO.2020-51—EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ACTIONS TO
FURTHER STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY, AUTHORITY AND
CONTROL AS RELATED TO LOCAL ZONING AND HOUSING ISSUES
SUMMARY
This item is presented to the City Council at the request of Council Member Margaret Clark. She
would like to discuss and request your approval of Resolution No. 2020-51,related to the support
for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control of local zoning and
housing issues.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2020-51, entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA,
EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ACTIONS TO
FURTHER STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY,
AUTHORITY, AND CONTROL AS RELATED TO
LOCAL ZONING AND HOUSING ISSUES
DISCUSSION
Cities have had to respond to state legislation that undermines the principle of local control
over important issues such as land use, housing, finance, infrastructure, elections, labor
relations and other issues directly affecting cities. Legislation introduced in 2017-2020 has
continually threatened local control in flagrant opposition to the principle of local control.
This has included, but not been limited to:
• Senate Bill 649 (Hueso) Wireless Telecommunications Facilities ("SB 649") in
2017;
• Assembly Bill 252 (Ridley-Thomas) Local Government: Taxation: Prohibition:
AGENDA ITEM 6.0
City Council Meeting
December 8,2020
Page 2 of 3
Video Streaming Services ("AB 252") in 2017;
• Senate Bill 827 (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Transit-Rich Housing Bonus ("SB
827") in 2018; and
• Senate Bill 50 (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Housing Development: Incentives
("SB 50") in 2019.
In 2017, SB 649 would have allowed the use of small cell wireless antennas and
related equipment without a local discretionary permit in all zoning districts as a use
by-right, subject only to an administrative permit. SB 649 passed out of the State
Assembly and the State Senate despite over 300 cities and 47 counties in California
providing letters of opposition. Ultimately, Governor Brown vetoed the bill.
In 2017, AB 252 would have prohibited any tax on the sale or use of video streaming
services, including sales and use taxes and utility user taxes. Prior to its first
Committee hearing in 2017, AB 252 received opposition letters from 37 cities, the
League of California Cities, South Bay Council of Governments, California Contract
Cities Association, and nine other organizations. This bill failed in the Assembly
Revenue and Taxation Committee 8-0-2,which the author of the Committee chaired.
In 2018, SB 827 was introduced and would have overridden local control on housing
development that was within V2 mile of a major transit stop or '/4 mile from a high-
quality bus corridor as defined by the legislation with some limitations. On April 17,
2018, SB 827 failed in the Senate Transportation and failed to move forward during
the legislative cycle.
In 2018, the City of Beverly Hills sponsored a resolution adopted by the League of
California Cities ("League"). The resolution called for the League to assess the
increasing vulnerabilities to local authority,control, and revenue. It also called for the
League to explore the preparation of a ballot -measure and/or constitutional
amendment.
In 2019, Senator Wiener reintroduced many of the provisions contained in SB 827 in
SB 50. The League of California Cities, working in concert with numerous
jurisdictions and state elected officials,were able to secure a narrow defeat of this bill
in the state Senate in January 2020.
The proposed Resolution urges the legislature and the Governor to stop proposing
new bills until the recently adopted laws have had a chance to go into effect. As of
January 1, 2020, for example, several new laws allowing accessory dwelling units in
zones that allow single-family and multi-family uses went into effect. These include
AB 68, AB 881, and SB 13 which, explicitly prohibits local agencies from including
in development standards for ADUs requirements on minimum lot sizes, among other
City Council Meeting
December 8,2020
Page 3 of 3
requirements. Laws like AB 671, which also went into effect this year, now require
local agencies' housing elements to include a plan that incentivizes and promotes the
creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for very low, low-, or moderate
income households, along with grants and other financial incentives in connection
with planning,construction,and operation of affordable ADUs.All of these laws need
time to see the full impacts to communities before new proposals are added onto them.
In addition, the existing housing element process establishes guidelines that
communities to adhere to in order to address their fair share of housing demand.
Housing elements must be approved by the state and include significant input from
residents, community members, and interested housing advocates. Enacting broad
statewide regulations undermines this local, iterative process, which is currently
underway.
Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution
expressing support for local control related to housing and other zoning matters.
STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT -None
FISCAL IMPACT -None
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Attachment A: Resolution No. 2020-51
E F
'9
laO
CIVIC PRIDE
flop
41/ ',I
K..............
141C°RPORP MO 14°
Attachment A
Resolution No. 2020-51
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-51
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, EXPRESSING SUPPORT
FOR ACTIONS TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN
LOCAL DEMOCRACY, AUTHORITY, AND
CONTROL AS RELATED TO LOCAL ZONING AND
HOUSING ISSUES
WHEREAS,the legislature of the State of California each year proposes and passes,and
the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills addressing a range of housing issues; and
WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of California and the Governor do not allow
sufficient time between each legislative cycle to determine if the legislation is successful in
bringing about change to the State of California's housing issues; and
WHEREAS, the majority of these bills usurp the authority of local jurisdictions to
determine for themselves the land use policies and practices that best suit each city and its residents
and instead impose mandates that do not take into account the needs and differences of
jurisdictions throughout the State of California; and
WHEREAS,the ability of local jurisdictions to determine for themselves which projects
require review beyond a ministerial approval; what parking requirements are appropriate for
various neighborhoods within their jurisdiction;what plans and programs are suitable and practical
for each community rather than having these decisions imposed upon cities without regard to
circumstances of each individual city;and what zoning should be allowed for residential properties
is a matter of great import to the City of Rosemead among other items related to local zoning and
housing issues; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemead feels strongly that our local
government is best able to assess the needs of our community and objects to the proliferation of
State legislation that deprives us of our ability to govern.
NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Rosemead does hereby resolve as follows:
1
SECTION 1. The City of Rosemead is opposed to the current practice of the legislature
of the State of California of continually proposing and passing multitudes of bills that directly
impact and interfere with the ability of cities to control their own destiny through the use of the
zoning authority that has been granted to them.
SECTION 2. The City of Rosemead will explore various ways to protect the ability of
cities to retain local control over zoning as each individual city within the State of California is
best suited to determine how the zoning in their city should allocated in order to meet the housing
needs of the community.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of December 2020.
Sandra Armenta, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ericka Hernandez, City Clerk Rachel H. Richman, City Attorney
2