In draft program guidelines  issued last week, the Strategic Growth Council staff will recommend eliminating the jurisdictional cap on funding, increasing the cap for individual developers from $15 million to $40 million, and setting aside 10% of the funding for rural projects. However, the SGC staff recommendations stop short – so far – of a setaside for each region, as some metropolitan planning organizations requested.  Instead, the SGC staff has recommended that MPO staff should review full AHSC applications based on consistency with each MPO's sustainable communities strategy and provide formal recommendations to the SGC as to which applications should be funded. However, more options may be presented to the SGC at its October meeting.  The staff recommendations include a wide variety of other changes, including increasing the points awarded for deep housing subsidies on affordable housing projects. Overall, the SGC staff is recommending a 50-50 split in the scoring criteria between GHG emissions reductions and other policy criteria, such as affordable housing and collaboration between transportation and housing projects. Last year, the GHG reduction accounted for 55% of possible points, while policy objectives accounted for 30% and 15% went to "project readiness and feasibility".  The SGC staff will provide more specifics at the council's October 15 meeting and the SGC is expected to approve final program guidelines at its December 17 meeting. Written comments will be accepted until October 30 via the official AHSC email address, AHSC@sgc.ca.gov At the October meeting, the SGC staff is expected to bring forth additional options on four topics: * Statewide Geographic Distribution of Funds  *  Technical Assistance for AHSC Applicants  * Coordination with Metropolitan Planning Organizations  * Alignment of AHSC with the Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation program The AHSC program is funded with cap-and-trade proceeds paid by polluters. At the end of the first program year in June, the SGC awarded $122 million in grants for infrastructure and development projects.  In 2015-16, the AHSC pot is expected to increase to $400 million. However, SGC was criticized for placing strict caps on the amount of funding developers and jurisdictions could receive, shorting rural areas, and not taking regional equity into consideration.  Among the highlights of the proposed guidelines: * Instead of requiring investment in transit infrastructure, the guidelines would recognize transit infrastructure investments already made – recognizing that in some cases this investment is not required for the proposed development project to work. * Ten percent of the funds would be set aside for investments in newly defined "Rural Innovation Project Areas," though these funds would roll over into the main program if not enough rural applications are received. * Projects will receive credit for active transportation, urban greening, green building, energy efficiency, and renewable energy. * Minimum and maximum awards will increase from $500,000 to $1 million and from $15 million to $20 million. * Individual developers will be subject to a $40 million cap across all their proposals, up from $15 million.

The California Transportation Commission has released staff recommendations  (pdf) for the awarding of up to $215 million in grants in Cycle 2 of its Active Transportation Program . The grants are designed to help localities fund improvements to promote cycling, walking, and other alternative modes of transportation. Funding will be broken down into three categories: statewide (50 percent), small urban and rural (10 percent), and large metropolitan planning organizations (40 percent). The commission received 617 applications totaling over $1 billion in grant requests. Commission staff narrowed the list down to 86 projects in the statewide category and 27 in the rural/small urban category. The vast majority of recommended projects are in disadvantaged communities. The program will be finalized at the October 21-22 commission meeting.  Petition Filed to Take San Jose Housing Case to Supreme Court San Jose's law forcing developers to build affordable housing is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court, after lawyers representing developer interests and property rights advocates filed a petition saying that the law and others like it across California violate federal constitutional protections. The California Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law, which requires developers to offer 15 percent of units in new projects at below-market rates. The industry argues the law is an unconstitutional "taking" of property and that San Jose has not established a connection between the building of new housing and the affordable housing problem. "The California Supreme Court's ruling carves arbitrary limits and loopholes in core constitutional property-rights safeguards as laid down by the U.S. Supreme Court," Brian Hodges, the Pacific Legal Foundation's attorney, told the  Contra Costa Times .  S.F. Bay Water Quality Improves A new report finds that the waters of the San Francisco Bay are clean enough to swim in and that the fish are edible, despite lingering mercury and PCBs from over a hundred years of mining and industry. Most chemicals measured in the Pulse of the Bay report, released by the San Francisco Estuary Institute, were below the threshold of concern, though the water around the Oakland and Richmond harbors and Hunters Point, along with the shoreline on the western side of the South Bay, have high concentrations of PCBs. Mercury is still seeping down from rivers into the bay, but chinook salmon and jacksmelt in the bay are safe to eat. The report also found that Marina Lagoon was the worst place to swim in the bay, and it predicted that water quality of the bay in 50 years will improve as runoff and wastewater are recycled, but climate change will counteract some of the improvements by reducing flows of freshwater from the mountains into the bay by 2065. Los Angeles Proposes Plan for Funding Seismic Upgrades Los Angeles officials presented a plan for property owners and tenants to equally split the costs of retrofitting more than 1,000 concrete buildings and at least 12,000 wooden buildings that face the greatest risk of collapse in a major earthquake. In the plan, tenants would face rent increases of a maximum $38 per month over a five to ten year period. The proposal follows several months of back-and-forth between tenants and owners, as lawmakers hesitated to pass a similar measure to San Francisco's retrofitting law, which passed all the costs to tenants. Owners in Los Angeles are concerned that they wouldn't be able to obtain loans if they couldn't demonstrate that their properties could provide enough income to pay back the borrowed funds, placing hope on a state bill that would give owners a tax credit worth 30 percent of the retrofitting costs. Costs of strengthening wooden apartments could reach $130,000, while upgrading concrete buildings could run in the millions. S.D. Voters to Consider Tax for Convention Center San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer plans to put a new hotel room tax to voters to fund a contiguous expansion of the city's convention center. Faulconer's move comes in the wake of a highly-anticipated report that found that the contiguous expansion would bring more dividends than an alternative proposal that would build a "campus" expansion several blocks away from the existing center. The contiguous expansion would build more than 300,000 square feet would cost $539 million as opposed to $428 million for the campus extension. But, according to a study commissioned by the city, a waterfront convention center would reap more than 2.5 times in spending by convention goers. However, with Faulconer's support of the contiguous expansion, JMI Realty, the owners of a parcel of property across the street that was planned to become a 1,600-room hotel to go along with the expansion, might not build the project, as it favored the campus extension. Faulconer's plan would require a two-thirds vote and could be subject to a legal challenge through the California Coastal Act. Proposed S.F. Moratorium Would be Ineffectual, Says Study San Francisco's chief economist has found no evidence that a highly-contentious proposed moratorium on development in the Mission district would stop evictions or slow gentrification. The report from Ted Egan finds that the 18-to-30 month market rate housing moratorium would have no potential benefits like opening up land for affordable housing developers to buy, and that market rate housing actually drives down home prices in surrounding blocks. The report also finds that 97 percent of new upper-income people who move to San Francisco go into existing housing, not new housing. "A temporary moratorium would lead to slightly higher housing prices across the city, have no appreciable effect on no-fault eviction pressures and have a limited impact on the city's ability to produce affordable housing during the moratorium period," the report reads. The moratorium, if approved on the Nov. 3 ballot, would delay the construction of 752 to 807 units for an average of 10 to 17 months. Housing Advocates Target City of Lafayette San Francisco housing advocates are attempting to "Sue the Suburbs" to bring denser housing to the Bay Area -- once they can find a plaintiff. The effort specifically zooms in on a development in the city of Lafayette which originally would have brought in 315 moderate income units, but is now bringing 44 single-family homes that will sell for $1.2 million on average. Housing advocates, saying that one suburb's resistance to bring in dense housing exacerbates the housing crisis across the region, is trying to find people who could have rented one of the 315 apartments in the original plan had it been approved. The basis of the effort, begun by the San Francisco Bay Area Renters' Federation, comes from the 1982 Housing Accountability Act, which forbids a jurisdiction from denying approval, or reducing a project's density, unless it threatens health and safety in demonstrable ways. If they succeed, the effort could serve as an opening for officials to use the courts to force NIMBYs to accept density. Light Rail Alternatives from L.A. to Artesia Released The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority has released its alternatives for a light rail line between Downtown Los Angeles and Artesia. Urbanize LA highlights four alternative alignments to the light rail, which include a bus rapid transit and a low-speed maglev. The Southern Califorina Association of Governments has recommended the light rail as the preferred option for the West Santa Ana Branch, funded by the Measure R half-cent sales tax, while exploring two separate alignments on the East Bank and the West Bank of the Los Angeles River, costing $3.79 billion and $4.31 billion respectively. Study Predicts Three-Foot Rise in S.F. Bay by 2100 Climate change could cause the sea level of the San Francisco bay to rise by three feet by 2100, resulting in catastrophic damage to shoreline marshes critical to the health of the estuary, scientists with the San Francisco Estuary Partnership warn in a new report . The scientists issued a call for a major campaign to truck in sediment to replenish marshlands depleted by 160 years of construction of dams, levees, and shoreline developments that cut off normal freshwater flows. With rising sea levels due to climate change, the marshlands will serve as an important buffer between the sea and land. "Some of these marshes will serve as sponges," said Zach Wasserman, the chairman of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, "and there are other urbanized areas we will need to build up barriers to protect from rising waters." Nine Species to Undergo Review for Endangered Status The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has decided that there is enough evidence to warrant in-depth review of the conservation status of several California species under the Endangered Species Act. The 90-day findings found enough information to review the  California spotted owl, Inyo Mountains salamander, Kern Plateau salamander, lesser slender salamander, limestone salamander, Panamint alligator lizard, Shasta salamander, southern rubber boa, and tricolored blackbird, and to not delist the Stephens' kangaroo rat. Ventura County Considers Transportation Tax Polls show that support is growing for Ventura County to put a ballot measure for a half-cent sales tax to fund transportation improvements, almost garnering the needed two-thirds majority as 60 percent of responders said they would support the measure. Approval of the tax - a version of which every other county in Southern California currently has - would help officials widen HIghway 101 at a cost of $800 to $900 million, adding a lane in each direction along 28 miles, and would add one to two lanes to State Route 118 at a cost of $150 million. The county is about $300 million to $400 million short for both projects, according to Darren Kettle, executive director of the Ventura County Transportation Commission. The average motorist in the county now wastes about 23 hours a year stuck in rush-hour traffic, and amount of delays experienced on the 101 is expected to jump by 50 percent by 2035 if no improvements are made.

The California Coastal Commission and the Navy reached a settlement in the commission's lawsuit against a proposed redevelopment of the Navy's downtown waterfront property in San Diego, leaving just one more legal hurdle for the Navy to clear to build the $1.2 billion, 3.25 million square foot plan. The settlement came as project developer Doug Manchester made concessions including opting to build a 40,000 square foot museum across from the USS Midway Museum, pledging to make more than 3,100 parking spaces available to the public on holidays and weekends, and posting signs directing people to the waterfront. All in all, the project will be built entirely on land granted to the Navy by voters in 1920 and would include 2.9 million square feet of office space, including a 351,000-square-foot regional headquarters for the Navy, 1,375 hotel rooms, 213,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space, and a 1.9-acre public park, along with the museum and parking spaces. However, Cory Briggs, the attorney representing the coalition provigin the last legal challenge under the National Environmental Policy Act, called the settlement "lipstick on the pig," saying that the project should instead consist of a bigger waterfront park. Applications Submitted for Delta Water Tunnels Officials have submitted the first permit applications to construct two 30-mile tunnels to transport water from the San Joaquin Delta to Central and Southern California. In an effort to upgrade current systems that Governor Jerry Brown has called inefficient, outdated, and vulnerable to earthquakes, the Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation are seeking approval to build three giant water intakes to draw water from the Sacramento River to feed into the $17 billion tunnels. The State Water Resources Control Board, which must approve or reject the request, expects to complete its review within two years, agency spokesman Timothy Moran told the Associated Press. Brown Proposes $3.6 Billion Infrastructure Fix Gov. Jerry Brown is proposing to spend $3.6 billion a year to repair California's transportation infrastructure by increasing annual vehicle registration charges and by increasing stagnant gas taxes. Specifically, Brown's proposal says that an increased $65 annual registration charge would generate $2 billion per year, with $500 million from fees charged to polluters and $100 million from "efficiencies" at Caltrans. Additionally, Brown's proposal would change the gas tax, which hasn't been altered in 20 years, by setting it at a fixed rate based on a 5-year average then adding index increases to the consumer price index. However, the proposal did not appear to have a necessary two-thirds majority in both houses to pass. "Unfortunately, the administration's ideas call for more than doubling the vehicle registration fees and raising the price of fuel on all Californians – we disagree and think Californians have paid enough," Assembly Minority Leader Kristen Olsen said in a statement. Sacramento Approves Plan to Encourage 10,000 Housing Units The Sacramento City Council approved a plan to help developers create 10,000 new, dense housing units by eliminating inefficiencies and making a "builder's toolkit" by the end of the year to. "We've got a lot of great tools that people can use. But the toolkit really assembles all of that information in one place that they can access," Tyrone Roderick Williams of the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency told Capital Public Radio. The city will also create an environmental impact report that allows for construction in different areas of downtown. Gehry May Lead L.A. River Redesign The firm of of architect Frank Gehry unveiled first steps in redesigning the Los Angeles River , attempting to create "a continuous experience along the river," as architect Anand Devarajan said at a press conference. Commissioned by the city-affiliated nonprofit group L.A. River Revitalization Corp., the firm surveyed the 52 miles of waterways and developed most of a detailed, three-dimensional landscape model of its preliminary plans. The project could include reengineering of the river to improve water reclamation and an overarching scheme for parkland, real estate development, and pedestrian paths. Omar Brownson of the L.A. River Revitalization Corp. said that the group is trying to arrange funding to pay for the next phase of the study, which would take three to six months. Water Use Down Over 30 Percent Californians slashed water use by 31.3 percent in July, exceeding Governor Jerry Brown's calls for water conservation during the state's historic drought. Water experts say deepening knowledge of the four-year drought on top of increasing water restrictions in many parts of the state are driving California's conservation success. Governor Brown demanded a 25 percent statewide cut in urban water use in June, applying to California's roughly 400 cities and water agencies, which were required to save between 4 and 36 percent over the baseline year 2013. The new data shows that 290 of 402 communities hit their targets, or were within 1 percent, in July, up from June when 265 of about 400 met their benchmarks. Statewide, urban water users cut 27.3 percent that month. Mall Developer Seeks to Circumvent Carlsbad Voters The Carlsbad City Council has approved a  voter initiative  to create a  shopping mall  on the shore of the Carlsbad lagoon, allowing the developer to bypass potentially costly and litigious CEQA review by invoking the state Supreme Court ruling in last year's Tuolumne case. The ruling allowed for city councils to directly approve developments that received the signatures of at least 15 percent of registered voters through a voter initiative, bypassing a special election or a CEQA review. The project, formally called the Aqua Hedionda South Shore Specific Plan, calls for a 27-acre Nordstrom-anchored shopping center, with 173 acres of open space for public trails and recreational activities. The company voluntarily submitted a 4,000-page environmental report to the city in May, though nonprofit opposition group North County Advocates did an air report that found that quantities of one airborne toxin would be eight times what Caruso's report found.  L.A.'s Pershing Square May Be Revamped Downtown Los Angeles' much maligned Pershing Square may finally get a redesign . The City Council voted to allow a nonprofit to launch an international design contest, with the City Council overseeing project management and fundraising. Funding for the project, sponsored by nonprofit Pershing Square Renew, will not come from the city's operations budget, while Department of Recreation and Parks and Macfarlane Partners both kicked in $1 million for redevelopment last year. The square is in a central location but has lacked visitors due to what many consider an uninviting design.  San Diego Warns NFL of Carson Stadium Location San Diego officials are trying to convince NFL owners to keep the Chargers in San Diego by saying that the team's plans to build a new stadium Carson are vulnerable to lawsuits and that a rival proposal in Inglewood is far superior. City Attorney Jan Goldsmith has spearheaded the radio and TV campaign, contrasting the Carson plan's 19-page stadium environmental analysis to what he called a far superior 6,000 page expedited draft Environmental Impact Report for a new stadium in San Diego. He also contrasted the plan with St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke's plan to build a new stadium in Inglewood. "Kroenke isn't building on a waste dump," Goldsmith told the Union-Tribune . "Do you know what their solution is : Put a cap on it, cover it with soil, call it a day and invite 70,000 people over to watch a game and have some hot dogs." Goldsmith also said that Carson's strategy of using a citizens initiative to avoid an Environmental Impact Report -- based on a state Supreme Court ruling last year -- could nevertheless invite lawsuits because of the novelty of the law. "There is risk there because it's new, it's untried," Goldsmith said. "We're not planning to sue anybody – we're not saying it's illegal. We're just saying there's all these risks in these big projects when you follow these laws." Sacramento Institutes Affordable Housing Fee Developers in Sacramento will pay a new fee of $2.58 per square foot of construction to go to affordable housing projects following a Sacramento City Council vote revamping the city's mixed-income housing regulations . The fees will be applied citywide, whereas a similar previous ordinance only applied them to "new growth areas" like North Natomas, and city officials said that the fees would accumulate $110 million in a trust fund for affordable housing projects over the next 20 years. While the measure was supported by building organizations and business groups who say it will bring consistency to low-income housing rules, some affordable housing advocates said that that fee would not generate the revenue needed to construct an adequate stock of affordable housing. "This is a sad day for the city of Sacramento," Darryl Rutherford, director of the Sacramento Housing Alliance, told the Sacramento Bee, adding that the fee would  "fall short of meeting the need of those who make this city strong." San Jose Investigates New Rent Control Rules The San Jose City Council agreed to take preliminary steps to alter the city's rent control laws to protect struggling renters being pushed out in the booming housing market there. The Council voted 9-2 to explore reducing the eight percent allowable rent increases under current rent control law and modify an option allowing property owners to pass mortgage costs to renters. Additionally, the Council will look into expanding the scope of rent control, as current law only covers apartments built from 1979 and 1995 and about 43,000 units build before 1979. City staff will also look into creating a "just cause" ordinance that would prevent landlords from using the Ellis Act to evict renters without cause and bring in new tenants with higher rents. Anaheim Approves More Funds for Streetcar Study Anaheim will spend another $1.3 million to study alternate routes for its proposed streetcar project to connect its new transit center to the Disneyland Resort and the Convention Center, aiming to avoid demolishing a local hotel. In a 3-2 vote, the City Council will increase to $10.9 million the total spent for an environmental review of the 3.2-mile project. Some, however, have criticized the city for spending money for studies that may not come to fruition, especially after more than $4 million was used to study an elevated track that was scrubbed in favor of a street-level system. "I think it's a waste of money at this point because I don't think this project will ever get built," said Mayor Tom Tait, who voted against the new study. If it's built, the streetcar's $318 million construction costs could be largely funded by a New Starts federal transit grant that the city still needs to apply for. It would cost about $4.3 million annually to operate the streetcar. Modesto Names New Community Development Director The City of Modesto has chosen Cindy Birdsill to run its Community and Economic Development Department. Formerly the economic and cultural director in the upscale Florida city of Coral Gables for six years, Birdsill initiated a $20 million streetscape project in that city, including more than $1 million in public art. Birdsill said that in Modesto she will focus on issues like economic development, downtown and building on Modesto's reputation as a cultural center through institutions like the Gallo Center for the Arts. L.A. Organization Wins ArtPlace America Grant The Little Tokyo Service Center, a community development organization in Los Angeles that focuses on affordable housing development and community organizing, will receive $3 million over the next three years for community placemaking projects, becoming one of six communities nationwide to win a total of $18 million from the nonprofit collaboration ArtPlace America . The awards come through ArtPlace's new Community Development Investments initiative designed to connect placemaking to economic development and neighborhood revitalization. Counties Respond to ‘Waters of the U.S.' Rule Suspension The National Association of Counties issued a statement praising a new federal ruling temporarily blocking the "Waters of the U.S." rule that included environmental restrictions for waterways along public infrastructure. "Counties and other local governments are charged with upholding federal, state and local regulations that protect water resources," said Matthew Chase, the executive director of the NAC. "We support common-sense environmental protections, but the federal agencies' one-size-fits-all approach draws little distinction between roadside public safety ditches and rivers or streams." Chase went on to encourage the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers to more adequately collaborate with counties in drafting new rules.

About 80 years too late, the federal government has put real regulatory authority behind the duty of publicly funded agencies to "affirmatively further fair housing". It's being discussed as a genuine chance to desegregate the suburbs.  On July 8 the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) issued its final rule on "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" (AFFH). Under the rule, state and local agencies receiving HUD funds must now do more than passively study barriers to fair housing: they must also make and follow genuine plans to reduce the barriers they describe. The new HUD rule was backed -- arguably, was made possible -- by the U.S. Supreme Court's unexpectedly liberal ruling of June 25 in Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc . The high court upheld a claim of disparate-impact discrimination against the Texas agency that allocates low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC). In the court's words, the group bringing the claim "alleged the Department has caused continued segregated housing patterns by its disproportionate allocation of the tax credits, granting too many credits for housing in predominantly black inner-city areas and too few in predominantly white suburban neighborhoods."  A lot of public commentary on these good changes, though well meant, is working from a dated model of what suburbs and cities are like. Some serious urban policy writers are talking about suburban desegregation as if it were the only fair housing goal. Meanwhile, there are separate conversations going about urban gentrification and displacement. Really the two issues belong together.  Disadvantaged people are caught in a pincer between old-fashioned suburban snobbery and new urban pricing-out. They are running out of places to go between the two. That's what unites this summer's terrible headlines about homelessness in rich downtowns and about police violence in segregated inner suburbs. That's why fair housing has to mean both urban affordability and suburban diversity. Recently Kriston Capps wrote for CityLab that the kinds of conflict in the HBO series Show Me A Hero are now appearing "in every city in America". The show depicts a conflict in 1987 suburban Yonkers in which the rhetoric of invasion and "social engineering" was used against low-income housing in Westchester County's largest city.  Certainly that kind of conflict is happening in a lot of cities and suburbs, as the long U.S. history of residential segregation is contested. Suburbs were intended from the start as enclaves of racial, economic and social exclusivity. The archetypal suburb of Levittown was whites-onl y. Many suburbs remained so until the 1948 case of Shelley v. Kraemer banned racially restrictive covenants on property deeds. Unofficial exclusion continued. Richard Rothstein of the Economic Policy Institute recently wrote that segregation is now worse than in 1968 and that recent conflicts in Baltimore and Ferguson are among its consequences.  But suburban desegregation battles are not the only type of conflict over housing justice. The current U.S. housing picture has a new aspect that didn't exist in the 1980s. Investment is returning to inner cities in a tidal reversal of 1960s "white flight". Alan Ehrenhalt calls it the "Great Inversion" . Westchester County has remained exclusive and excluding since the time depicted in Show Me a Hero, but New York City was not then as exclusive as it is now. That difference changes the relationship between suburb and city. Likewise in California, think of pairings like Marin County and San Francisco, or the tonier Westside versus central L.A., or the house-divided demographics of rich, poor and transitioning neighborhoods in Oakland and Berkeley. This is why conversations about the hopeful new developments in federal desegregation policy are incomplete if they focus only on integrating the suburbs. The Good News on Federal Desegregation Efforts An early analysis of the new HUD rul e by the deeply experienced National Low-Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) found a lot to welcome. It said the newly required Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) would push local agencies to analyze barriers to fair housing using HUD-provided data, to include public participation, and to apply well-articulated definitions of "fair housing issues". The agencies must then use their AFH reports to make plans for improvement that must form part of ongoing Consolidated Plans and housing authorities' five-year plans.  By contrast, it said the previous "Analysis of Impediments" requirement was so flimsy that "a classic abuse on the part of some jurisdictions was to assert that they were taking actions to overcome impediments to fair housing by placing fair housing posters around public places during Fair Housing Month."  Some housing experts felt the Supreme Court's ruling reflected the more conservative influence of the court's swing voter, Justice Anthony Kennedy, in setting a relatively difficult standard for proof of disparate impact. But it is still cause for celebration in the long battle to desegregate rich Dallas-area neighborhoods by race and income.  A further step toward accountable public spending on housing appeared this summer: the U. S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recommended that Congress allow HUD to share administration of the LIHTC program with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Since housing tax credits were at the core of the Texas fair housing case, this is an area where a more direct HUD role would help fair housing enforcement and might allow more public scrutiny of tax credit compliance processes. The fair housing task won't be easy, especially when it comes to persuading private landlords to accept Section 8 housing vouchers . But HUD is already trying. A recently issued new rule clarifying portability of Section 8 housing vouchers requires "that all families be provided an explanation of potential housing opportunities in areas with low concentration of low-income families, not just housing in high-poverty census tracts." The new HUD rule drives strongly enough toward justice that it has been taking mean overheated flak from the right since it was first proposed. Columnist Joy Overbeck's contribution on the "Town Hall" site, "Invasion of the City Dwellers: Coming to Your Neighborhood," is an example. The new rules, she argued, would eviscerate local land use controls, "importing low-income city-dwellers into your community," expressing "naked class envy" and seeking "to turn the suburbs left" with "a new invasion of Democrat voters – among them the low income, no income, welfare-dependent, gang members, homeless, and illegal immigrants".  In other words, the rules are ambitious enough to make bigots nervous, and they might genuinely help poor families. Certainly many poor families have good reasons to move to richer neighborhoods and not enough chances to do so. Many writers this summer cited Harvard economists Raj Chetty (who has now moved to Stanford), Nathaniel Hendren and Lawrence Katz for their findings of greater economic success among the children of families brought by the Moving to Opportunity program to what the authors bluntly called "better neighborhoods" . Barbara Sard of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities wrote in a 2013 comment on the HUD rule at its proposal stage that the great majority of people receiving federal housing assistance do live in areas of concentrated poverty and "only 12 percent of black and 10 percent of Hispanic households used their vouchers to live in predominantly white neighborhoods" -- an "extreme result... unlikely to be the product of families' informed choices." The Great Inversion Because of the Great Inversion, though, informed choices need to include the right to keep one's housing even when local land sale prices rise, as well as the right to move to other places that present better opportunities. A few popular coastal cities, once dreaded by suburbanites as places of crime and deviance, have lately become the most attractive places to find high-paying jobs, rich resources and convenient public services. Inevitably those attractions have created overwhelming demand for middle-class housing. The resulting affordability crisis is forcing out existing neighbors who are often low-income people of color. Those vulnerable people who manage to remain end up living as hunkered-down barnacles to keep their irreplaceable current housing. In places like San Francisco's Bayview and Mission Districts, in my own South of Market neighborhood, in Palo Alto's last mobile home park , or in West Oakland , preserving a tenancy or house title can be a fair housing victory -- because if a low-income resident has to move, it will likely be to a poorer, more segregated suburb.  Last year's Causa Justa/Just Cause gentrification report gave a vivid account of displacement from Oakland and San Francisco, including "historically disinvested areas." It described neighborhoods becoming "wealthier and whiter," rents screaming upward, African American and Latino populations declining and losing homeownership.  And it's not over. The new Urban Displacement Project by UC Berkeley's Miriam Zuk and Karen Chapple reports data showing dire existing displacements and also provides "early warning" of more neighborhoods where signs have appeared that vulnerable residents will soon be driven out. Sadly it's the people now facing displacement who held cities together during the long years of disinvestment. In what Jane Jacobs called "un-slumming," neighbors struggled to preserve community in downtown slums and in redlined, segregated single-family residential districts. Against odds, they founded nonprofits and businesses, tended gardens, created public art, saved old buildings from condemnation, tamed redevelopment agencies, cared for each other. Friends and neighbors literally nursed each other through the opening urban AIDS crisis. Neighbors supporting neighbors created the walkable, livable neighborhoods that investors now value. A Double Problem, and More Than One Answer Disadvantaged people are now trapped in the pincer: between gentrifying cities and excluding suburbs. No wonder the demographic reports say "concentrated poverty" has worsened in certain inner suburbs: the displacement destinations are shrinking. Brookings Institution researcher Elizabeth Kneebone reported last yea r that as of 2012, more U.S. people lived below the federal poverty line in suburbs than in "big cities or rural communities," while from 2008 to 2012, "suburban communities experienced the fastest pace of growth in the number of poor residents living in concentrated poverty over this time period." Ferguson, Missouri is a suburb . So a real fair housing policy has to push back at both sides of the pincer. Dispersal to the suburbs isn't the only way to fight segregation, and for several reasons it shouldn't be. Moving doesn't help everyone. A one-way move from a center-city housing project to an "area of opportunity" in a still-prosperous suburb might be a grand, life-expanding possibility for a family of modestly employed, car-owning parents and their school-age children. The same choice might mean anomic hell for an urban retiree who hasn't driven a car in years and who depends for health, safety and home care on a support network of existing neighbors.  Another concern is how HUD's attempt to help disadvantaged people share the good life might interact with the urban-suburban population exchange. What if the resources and private investment that secure the good life are slipping out from under an apparently prosperous suburb just as hopeful new residents arrive from the city to claim their fair share? There's also the risk of uncritically reviving the "melting pot" idea. In a sense the doctrine of "moving to opportunity" recalls the victim-blaming 1960s "culture of poverty" doctrine. Look farther back and you find mid-century notions of coerced assimilation as benevolence, as in the case of the notorious Dillon Myer , who pressed formerly incarcerated Japanese Americans and Native Americans from reservations to disperse in the cities. On the urban affordability side, standard prescriptions include calls for generically increasing housing supply; creating incentives to build and maintain affordable units; cushioning existing neighbors against immiseration and expulsion; rehousing people in or near homelessness; palliating homelessness. That talk overlaps the fair housing conversations on subjects like increasing the density of practically usable and affordable housing ("supply" is an odd word considering the millions of rotting foreclosures). Likewise it overlaps in discussing the segregating effects of exclusive suburban zoning -- and disputing, endlessly, whether urban market-rate construction raises or lowers affordability. The overlap isn't very strong, though. If more people were talking about urban displacement and suburban exclusion at the same time, they might find more ways of addressing both at once.  For example, there hasn't been much talk yet about applying the "affirmatively furthering fair housing" toolbox in the urban affordability crisis. The new AFH requirement is carefully characterized as a planning tool but it is intended in part for fair housing agencies that already have enforcement authority. Could those address private evictions and foreclosures that have disparate impacts on disadvantaged people? When publicly funded programs reconfigure urban subsidized or public housing, is it a fair housing issue if they reduce the number of subsidized units or the depth of the subsidies? At least should administrators of housing programs be scrutinizing evictions from their subsidized units for signs of illegal discrimination, including with respect to disability ? HUD Officials Understand, But What Will They Do? The record of public comments and HUD responses on the AFFH final rule shows many affordable housing advocates and HUD staff were seeing the housing picture whole: old-fashioned suburban snobbery, new urban pricing-out, and excluded populations caught between the two.  The exchange was uneasy although knowledgable. For example, Executive Director Alan Greenlee of the Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing asked in his 2013 commen t for the AFFH rule to "accommodate ... programmatic activity that seeks to change the nature of low-income communities through investment instead of encouraging the movement of residents to other communities. In addition, the rule does not seem to adequately safeguard historically low-income communities from the adverse impacts of gentrification. As communities begin to change, it is important to safeguard the financial interests of current residents who would prefer to stay in their communities." HUD's discussion of comments in its final rule acknowledged and responded to concerns about policy language that emphasized mobility as the key to fairness. Revisions that appeared in the final rule provided warm but less than specific reassurances endorsing "balance" between "place-based" and "mobility" approaches to fairness.  Since the final rule emerged, skepticism from groups such as NLIHC has persisted on how the balance will work out in practice. The National Housing Law Project, which included "balance" concerns in its 2013 regulatory comment , has even pointed out a concern published in the Crain's business journal : that it would be possible to accuse New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio of thwarting fair housing goals through his plan to build 80,000 units of affordable housing, on the grounds that much of the housing would be in areas that are historically low-income though now gentrifying. Of course in San Francisco, 80,000 units of affordable housing sounds like an impossible miracle. The rarity of that New York City example is a reminder that a fully effective fair housing policy would take more fair housing subsidy money than there's political will to provide – or a less unequal economy than the one we've backed into.  For now at least we can talk about using the resources we have to retain or expand housing choice wherever it's possible, on both the urban and the suburban sides of the exclusion bind.

The California Supreme Court has agreed to hear two important planning and development cases - one involving Banning Ranch in Newport Beach and one involving the seemingly endless Newhall Ranch project.  In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach , the Fourth District Court of Appeal overturned trial judge's ruling and ruled that Newport Beach's "approval" of the Banning Ranch project had not violated the California Environmental Quality Act, even though the city had not dealt with specific mitigations.  The ruling was based in large part on the fact that Newport Beach's Coastal Land Use Plan specifically excludes Banning Ranch, meaning final authority for approval of the Banning Ranch project lies with the Coastal Commission, not the city. Meanwhile, Friends of the Santa Clara River v. County of Los Angeles (Newhall Land & Farming), is one of several cases  in which environmentalists in the Santa Clarita Valley are challenging Newhall Land & Farming's plans to develop Newhall Ranch. In an unpublished ruling in April, the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court ruling upholding L.A. County's certification of the final environmental impact report for phase one of the project, known as Landmark Village. Many of the issues in the EIR revolve around water supply - a longstanding point of contention between Newhall and environmentalists.

The intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Fairfax Boulevard is under an evil spell.  Otherwise, I can't account for the two most questionable museum proposals to descend on the area formerly known as the Miracle Mile. Making those proposals even more surprising is that two architects responsible for two separate proposals � Renzo Piano and Peter Zumthor � are among the most gifted museum designers in the world. Renzo Piano has a gift for conceiving museums and museum renovations that seem perfect for their sites. In San Francisco, the rolling roofline of his Academy of Science Museum in San Francisco, covered in a layer of green planting, has attracted new crowds to Golden Gate Park. His new Whitney Museum in New York, in contrast, manages to address the differing scales of surrounding buildings, while responding confidently to the tough urban texture of the surrounding industrial district. Piano was also responsible for a modest redesign of the existing LACMA campus, a new entrance sequence that began at the parking structure , rather than Wilshire Boulevard, which made long-familiar buildings and spaces seem new.  Yet the very same Piano is proposing a giant sphere for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Sited to the immediate north of, and attached to, the landmark May Company building, the big ball looks like a golf ball with the bottom third sliced off. The top half of the sphere is glass, which will cover a dome-like ceiling. In fairness, it could be very impressive from the interior. Globes, or at least domes, have captivated architects since Roman times. At the time of revolutionary France, the architect Boullee, who specialized in imaginary, impossible-to-build ideas, famously proposed an immense hollow globe as a monument to Isaac Newton. More recently, architect James Polshek designed a largely glass ball for the Apple store in Manhattan, which won wide attention for the local temple to i-Gadgetery. If the spherical shape of the building has some art historical roots, why is this particular museum adopting it? Specifically, how does a sphere connote Hollywood movies? Does this shape allude to the bouncing ball we followed in movie sing-alongs of the 1940s? Or the spinning globe of the world that appeared at the beginning of movies from Universal Studios? No, it's the majestic ball of light that accompanies the arrival of the alien spacecraft in "Encounters of the Third Kind." As if the sphere were not daring enough, the architect has proposed that the bulk of the ball is to be cantilevered outward from a skinny base, which makes the structure appear slightly absurd, like a hedgehog rearing back on its hind legs. (The massive overhang is not a pure cantilever, actually, because there is a single structural column beneath the ball, like the invincible arm of Mighty House holding the world. Actually, I suspect the sphere-plus-cantilever is a gimmick meant to suggest special effects and the suspension of disbelief. Still, the design seems forced and unintentionally funny, like an animated cartoon about an Airstream trailer that is filling full of water � the work no doubt of that rascally Roadrunner! � and seems ready to burst. No doubt, Piano wants to open up some more sidewalk space for pedestrians, so visitors will be able to examine the architecture and make cooing noises at close range. Yet is the spectacular effect of the cantilever worth the brain damage in structural engineering? Is there an easier way to achieve the same goal?  The normally reliable architecture critic of the Los Angeles Times, Christopher Hawthorne, has suggested that further design is needed. That's a safe way to sidestep the issue. City lovers seeking further frustration, meanwhile, can go next door to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art to check up on the latest iteration of the proposed redesign of that sprawling, multi-building institution.   As discussed in a previous post , LACMA would like to scrape nearly all the existing buildings that Piano was so careful to preserve in his redesign. Zumthor was chosen by LACMA chief executive Michael Govan to reconceive the entire museum as a single, sprawling structure. In the two earlier design phases, the architect created a squiggly, soft-edged footprint for LACMA inspired, perhaps by the ink-blotch outlines of the local tar pits. The second iteration in particular worried me, because Zumthor proposed a second-story bridge crossing Wilshire Boulevard, apparently in the interest of creating an uninterrupted museum-going experience. From an architectural viewpoint, the bridge could be seen as a cool idea; from an urban design vantage, however, it's destructive. Much of the view of Wilshire Boulevard from this important intersection would be blotted out by a thick bar of black glass, resembling a black censor mark. Version Three of the LACMA design introduces something like a row of seven self-contained pavilions, laid end to end like a row of dominoes. If I'm reading the plan correctly, the concept of self-contained galleries, while possibly more manageable from a curatorial standpoint than an endless ribbon of exhibition space, goes against the notion of a continuous path around the museum. But abandoning the "endless" circulation scheme, means, in part, that the rationale for the bridge across Wilshire Boulevard has also gone away. Yet the bridge survives in the third version of the LACMA design, even though the bridge has no programmatic reason to exist other than to trumpet the size and importance of this public museum. But is the museum so important that it should allowed to block the view of everything east of Fairfax on Wilshire Boulevard? In Los Angeles, private developers often get cast in the role of insensitive city wreckers. In this case, a public arts institution is advocating an insensitive and irreversible act of city killing, and using tax dollars toward that purpose. Exciting buildings, even great ones, don't make sense if the sense of urban coherence is damaged. But try to tell that to Govan, the self-appointed arbiter of taste who thinks that that the most important thoroughfare in Los Angeles is his own personal toy to play with and to break.  Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has already endorsed the bridge concept, with apparently little protest.  Like I said, there's an evil spell on the place. When the spell wears off, however, Los Angeles residents may be dismayed by the results.

On an unusually hot February afternoon in downtown Los Angeles, I conducted a field walk assessment to help a client identify potential sites for a bikeshare "mobility hub." Standing on a  corner near the Convention Center, I noted that we were at the border between two Census tracts. Ordinarily, this border wouldn't matter much—the neighborhood isn't discernibly different on one side or the other—but in this case, I was helping the client apply for a state grant program that gives special consideration to projects located in "disadvantaged communities."  If located on the south side of the street, the project would be located in a "disadvantaged" census tract, but not on the north side.  "Well, let's clearly locate the hub on the south side," the client advised, with some incredulous laughter. Humorous as it may sound, this decision speaks to the serious policy weight—and dollars—the State of California has put behind the concept of "benefitting disadvantaged communities."   Given that discretionary grant programs worth hundreds of millions of dollars—from the Active Transportation Program established by SB 99 to the newly-minted Transit and Intercity Rail Program (TICRP) and Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program funded by cap-and-trade revenues—are using this policy framework to evaluate and fund projects, this concept deserves to be scrutinized more deeply than it has been to-date.  Nine years after the passage of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, the spigot of the State's cap and trade revenues has begun flowing in earnest, with the recent announcement of a combined $346 million in TICRP  and AHSC   iscretionary grants. The first round of funding offers an opportunity for reflection. Which projects were funded? How well is cap-and-trade meeting its policy goals? How might the program guidelines be improved for the next round?  I assisted in writing a successful $38 million TICRP grant application to implement L.A. Metro's  Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station Area Master Plan and operational improvements on Metro's Blue Line. I also prepared two AHSC applications on behalf of local cities in Southern California that were unsuccessful.  While it is impossible to know the decisive factor(s) in the selection process, the success, and failure, of these various projects in securing grant funds is in all likelihood strongly tied to their location in a particular census tract.  SB 535 requires at least 25 percent of the state's cap-and-trade revenues to benefit "disadvantaged communities,"  he idea being to mitigate the impacts of pollution and global warming on the State's most vulnerable residents. As the environmental justice movement has long recognized, poor communities are often disproportionately impacted by health harms associated with the location of infrastructure, from freeways to power plants.  As well intentioned as SB 535's mandate is, it disregards some crucial nuances of the relationship between poor neighborhoods and poor people.  To define what a "disadvantaged community" is, the California Environmental Protection Agency's CalEnviroScreen 2.0 tool assigns a score to each of the state's 8,035 Census tracts, based on a combination of economic, demographic, and environmental factors, ranging from the straightforward (household median income) to the more obscure ("level of linguistic isolation"). Census tracts scoring in the highest quartile are assigned disadvantaged community—or "DAC"—status. DAC status results in preferential treatment during the grant application evaluation process. Given the intense competition for grant monies, an extra point attributable to DAC status can very well represent the difference between a funded and an unfunded project.  Perhaps the most troublesome application of DAC status is to the AHSC program. In the first round of funding this year, 77 percent of AHSC grants were located in DACs – 27 percentage points more than the AHSC guidelines called for, and 52 percentage points more than the 25 percent required under SB 535. All of the nine AHSC grants awarded within the City of Los Angeles are located in DACs; none west of the 405 Freeway. To its credit, the SGC did award 2 AHSC grants to affordable housing projects in the City of San Francisco that are not located in DACs.  Ironically, this preference threatens to further entrench geographic patterns of income inequality. It encourages the production of affordable housing in areas that are typically lower income – and therefore less expensive in the first place.  Shouldn't the fundamental policy goal of AHSC be to encourage affordable housing in affluent, transit-adjacent communities? Wouldn't environmental justice be better served with affordable housing in places like West Los Angeles/Santa Monica where the Expo Line Phase II light rail line will be opening in Summer 2016? These communities are typically closest to employment centers where such housing is needed most. In future rounds, the SGC has the discretionary authority to revise downward its DAC goal for the AHSC program without running afoul of SB 535. The SGC should exercise that authority, and leave itself maximum flexibility to fund projects in locations with a diverse mix of socioeconomic profiles. (Granted, the SGC cannot control what its pool of applicants looks like. Maybe the high concentration of AHSC-funded projects located in DACs is a product of the applicant pool rather than the evaluation policies set by SGC. But sometimes messaging is everything. The results of this first round send the unfortunate signal that if your project is not located in a DAC, it runs a lower chance of success.) Support for such a policy reboot comes from one of the key findings in a recent Legislative Analyst's Office report on the housing affordability crisis in California. Coastal areas viewed as highly desirable places to live have chronically under-produced housing (at all income levels). The greatest need for affordable housing is therefore in areas that are not necessarily disadvantaged.  My objection is not SB 535's focus on disadvantaged communities in general -- for some cap-and-trade programs, this focus addresses legitimate environmental justice issues. But it has been applied with a broad brush, without commonsense regard to the differences among the 12 individual state programs funded by cap and trade revenues. Projects shouldn't be more grant-worthy just because they're on a certain side of the street.  As the first major new revenue source for infrastructure in several decades, cap-and-trade will influence the shape of new growth and development in California for years to come. It's important for policymakers to get these grant programs right. With SGC currently taking stakeholder comments, let's hope that the guidelines for future funding rounds evolve to reflect the state's dire need for affordable housing in both disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged communities.  Adam Christian is a senior consultant in infrastructure funding and finance at HDR, Inc and the founder of Urban Insights.

Are there any two American cities more different from each other than Boston and Los Angeles? History vs. modernity, compactness vs. sprawl, chowder vs. kale, sun vs. snow, modesty vs. flash, intellect vs. entertainment.  Back in January, Boston beat out Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., to become the United States Olympic Committee's official pick to bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics. Since then, civic leaders in Los Angles have been nearly salivating with every hint of disaffection on the part of the Beantown faithful. Concerns were legion: Boston doesn't have room; Boston's transit system can't handle the crowds; Boston doesn't have the facilities; Boston doesn't want to spend billions; Boston, to be characteristically blunt, has better things to do. Even Boston's hometown newspaper, the Globe, called the bid " improbable ."   Boston bailed out July 27, with a Mayor Marty Walsh refusing to put taxpayer money at risk. Last week, all of two weeks after Boston's surrender, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti issued his first public statement about turning Boston's loss his city's gain, acknowledging  "very positive discussions with the United States Olympic Committee" and claiming, "the LA Olympics would inspire the world and are right for our city." Garcetti's attitude thus adds to the list of distinctions between the two cities. Whereas Boston wants nothing to do with the world's premiere global event, Los Angeles considers it its birthright.   According to one  poll , an insane 81 percent of Angelenos support an Olympics bid. We are either supremely enthusiastic or supremely blasé.  (The group that backed the San Francisco bid is mildly interested in a joint bid but seems otherwise content to let L.A. do its thing.)  Los Angeles deservedly gets a lot of mileage out of its Olympic history. Both the 1932 games and 1984 games were rousing successes, the latter turning a small profit (as compared with billions, and tens of billions, spent in Beijing and Sochi). Of course, no one involved with the 1932 games is still around, but, amazingly, the most important venue is: the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. Los Angeles takes the Olympics in stride because, as an urban behemoth dedicated to spectacle, it needs hardly lay a single brick. Garcetti's message to the USOC: "Want to have an Olympics here? No problem, let's check the calendar..."  By 2024, Los Angeles will have even more to offer the world, with miles of new light rail lines completed, more housing (we hope), more transportation options, and more vibrant neighborhoods. In fact, the development and planning efforts underway in Los Angeles constitute the best reasons not to seek the 2024 games.  I lived two years in Boston that were among the most miserable of my life. So, as a native Angeleno, I never thought I'd say this, but Los Angeles could stand to be more like Boston.   I don't mean that we should give up our pressed juice for Dunkin' Donuts or that we should start wearing boat shoes without socks. We could, however, stand to let some other city realize its Olympics dreams. As fun as the Olympics would be -- and there's no doubt that Los Angeles could pull it off well -- Los Angeles too has better things to do. In fact, we're already doing better things. Downtown and its surroundings are booming. Formerly anonymous neighborhoods, from Highland Park to Culver City, are on the rise. The City Council just adopted a revolutionary new mobility plan, and a revamp of the zoning code is underway. We have new museums and concert halls. We might have a river someday.   If you think about it, Los Angeles' build environment is becoming ever so slightly more similar to that of -- wait for it -- Boston.  Meanwhile, dire problems remain. We're short tens of thousands of housing units, with production only beginning to pick up. Gentrification is leading to displacement (anecdotally, at least). Traffic remains unbearable. LAUSD schools and others throughout the county remain shameful. Neighborhoods that were war zones in 1984 are more peaceful, but they're scarcely more healthy, with pollution and none of the Technicolor bounty of the farmers markets and Whole Foods that serve L.A.'s haves.  These positive developments, and these dire problems, all deserve our full attention, not just this year, but for many years to come.  I know the argument goes that an Olympics will be a catalytic event, bringing prosperity to the city. That's probably true for some Angelenos, but not for everyone. Ask residents of South Central, circa 1992, how much good the 1984 games did them. Ask the same of the aerospace workers whose plants closed and the generations of high school kids who have graduated hardly knowing how to write.  The fact is, Los Angeles needs to keep doing what it's doing -- and not distract itself with a global mega-event. (Interestingly, a private group is promoting an odd sort of transit-oriented  world's fair for the early 2020s.) We've proven that we can be our own catalysts: 2008's Measure R sales tax measure is having a bigger impact on the city than any sporting event could. We don't need stadiums around those new transit stops. We need housing. We need mobility hubs and wayfinding. We need thriving small businesses, not huge stadiums and not ads for corporate sponsors. And, let's face it, the reason why Los Angeles can hold an Olympics is the very reason why it doesn't need to hold an Olympics: Los Angeles already knows how to amuse itself. We have two of pretty much everything, including big-time football teams (the kind that don't pay their players). As I've written before, Los Angeles can thrive without the NFL. We can thrive without an Olympics too. And if we want to "beat" Boston at something, we can't rely on the Lakers anymore -- but we still have the Clippers.  In even my darkest days living in Boston, I could never deny the city's charms. Crooked streets, red bricks, wrought iron, leafy blocks, neighborhood pubs, and handsome public spaces are what cities are supposed to be about. It's no accident that Bostonians are willing to endure those awful winters. Boston has places that many Southern Californians, trapped on freeways and consigned to strip malls, can't even imagine. And yet, Los Angeles could have its own versions of Boston's delights. It just has to keep its eye on the ball.

LOS ANGELES — The Strategic Growth Council and partner agencies went from 0 to $120 million in the span of a few short months this year.  Spurred by the passage of a budget bill last year, g uidelines for the new Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities grant program came out in January, initial applications were accepted March, and just last month 28 grant awardees were announced.  With a new funding year fast approaching and potentially $400 million at stake, the SGC is trying to keep up its momentum — and correct some of the glitches that many have identified in this year's lightening round.  On Monday, SGC staff and several council members convened in Los Angeles to hear from stakeholders. They were met with ample amounts of kudos and critiques from the three dozen or so public officials, activists, and others who offered official verbal comments. (A similar workshop was held last week in Sacramento.) Staff and council members alike pledged their intention to make next year's selection process as fair and equitable as possible, while remaining faithful to the program's mandate to directly effect reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. SGC Chair Ken Alex said, with a hint of frustration, that this requirement likely prevents AHSC funds from going to planning efforts. Rather, funds must go to specific projects and programs that reduce GHG emissions, typically through reducing car trips.  "The overriding purpose of what we're doing with this grant fund is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," said Alex. "We're doing it in the context of transportation and housing, but….we as a legal matter always need to quantify those emissions reductions." SGC intends to revise the guidelines in August, release a draft in the fall, and vote on a final draft before January 1.  While commenters praised SGC's efforts and acknowledged the challenge of devising a new program in a short time frame, criticisms fell along several distinct themes:  SCAG's Slight. Officials at the Southern California Association of Governments and throughout the SCAG region reacted with dismay at the relatively small number of projects that were invited to submit full AHSC applications, with a disproportionate share of projects being located in the Bay Area. The SCAG finished strong, though, winning 9 of 28 awards. Not surprisingly, given the event's location in downtown Los Angeles, several speakers still smarted. They reminded the council that the region has 50 percent of the state's population and 66 percent of the state's disadvantaged communities. Many felt that the region's 22 percent share of AHSC funding was patently inequitable. They also questioned jurisdictional funding limits that took otherwise qualifying projects out of contention in both the SCAG region and the Bay Area. These limits, capping the amount a single city or developer could receive, were instituted to promote geographic diversity. Rural Reductions. Several speakers urged the council to consider ways to improve rural communities' chances or even to set aside a certain amount of funds for them. Speakers explained that rural communities' low densities and typical lack of transit prevent them from meeting many of the program's basic criteria. Many poor rural communities, they argued, can benefit significantly — in terms of both environmental benefits and economic development — from AHSC funds. Alex said that the the GHG reduction mandate could stifle efforts to direct funds to rural communities. Subsidiarity. Can any body based in Sacramento possibly evaluate individual development projects scattered in every corner of the state? That question led some  to lobby for what one speaker referred to as "subsidiarity." They encouraged SGC to look to the recommendations of MPO's in part to ensure that selected projects were upholding the respective MPOs' Sustainable Communities Strategies and to acknowledge MPOs' more intimate knowledge of their local needs.  Leading from Behind. One of the program's chief criteria is that of leverage, with AHSC monies being leveraged at a ratio of about 6 to 1 in the initial round. Some speakers felt that SGC awards should not always be used to supplement existing funds but rather could be some of the first dollars put into a project and therefore act as seed money to attract further funding.  In his closing statements, Alex tried to address many of these concerns, while pledging that SCG councilmembers and staff were dedicated to incremental improvement. The result will not be perfect, though. "Everybody needs to recognize that it's not going to come out perfectly," said Alex. "There are endless balances. Each time we allocate funds in different ways there are winners and losers." He noted, for instance, that disadvantaged communities in one region are competing against disadvantaged communities in other regions. Wealthy communities are not going to take funds away from poor ones.  While Alex acknowledged the dissatisfaction of many SCAG representatives, he encouraged SCAG to be proactive in next year's application processHe said, "SCAG needs to recognize that it needs to do some self-evaluation and see if there are ways that it can improve." He called the 22 percent number "a little artificial" because many SCAG projects did not meet minimal selection criteria in the first place. The responsibility for achieving equity is "on all of us," he said. Commentary Even if awards are a zero-sum game, the overall sum is going to get a lot bigger next year. With potentially three times as much money available (funded by the state's cap-and-trade system), there will be many more winners and, therefore, more opportunities for the SGC to appease competing interests. Though this likely means that a slew of worthy projects will receive funding, it also raises the possibility that certain interest groups will clamor for new criteria and set-asides that could detract from the objective process that SGC tried to establish this year.  These riches mean that SGC will have to be ever more diligent to maintain objectivity and ensure equity.  It also remains to be seen whether there are $400 million worth of projects that will have the same GHG impacts as did the small, elite group of 28 that were chosen this year. It's more than likely, though, that the promise of grant monies will spur cities and developers to put AHSC criteria into their designs, thus creating exactly the types of projects that the program intends to promote.  Resources and Related CP&DR Articles:  Workshop Presentation Materials  SCAG Wins In AHSC Grant Funding Recommendations Strategic Growth Council Posts AHSC Program Revisions Informally Cities Hustle for $120 Million in Funding from SGC

In response to escalating cost estimates for construction of California's high speed rail, two state senators have drafted a bipartisan bill to stop construction of the rail until a public revote can be taken on June 6, 2016. The bill, authored by Senators Andy Vidak, R-Hanford, and Rudy Salas, D-Bakersfield, is just one of eight other proposals to halt the project, though all previous bills have died in the legislature. But even if the legislature does not pass the bill, it is possible for the people to appeal directly for a re-vote, according to the State of California Department of Justice. "The High-Speed Rail Authority has failed to obtain private investment as promised to the voters and is now relying California's controversial cap-and-trade program to help fund the project," Vidak stated in a press release.  Kern County Releases Environmental Review of 2.8 Million Acres  Kern County has released the draft of a environmental review cataloging 2.8 million acres of oil and gas drilling across the county in an attempt to pave the way for the county itself to issue permits for drilling while charging oil companies for air quality mitigation measures. The report, which comes at a cost of over $12 million, calls for the county to charge petroleum producers between $12,500 and $23,000 per well. Funds would be dedicated to clean air projects, which, with 2,000 new wells being drilled in Kern every year, could come at a benefit of $20 million per year. The plan also attempts to serve agricultural interests in the wake of successful legal challenges in 2012 to drilling projects. Farmers accused companies with mineral rights of running roughshod over their fields without adequate compensation. The county plans to address this problem by making it quicker and cheaper for oil companies to drill if they can come to an agreement with surface owners, while subjecting them to several rounds of reviews if they cannot come to an agreement. Environmental groups, meanwhile, have called the plan an attempt to rubber-stamp drilling plans in the county. Report: New Housing in S.F. Results in Little Net Gain San Francisco can't solve its affordable housing crisis by just building more affordable units; instead, it has to preserve the ones it already has, according to a new report by the San Francisco Planning Department. For every 10 units that developers build there, according to the report, more than eight units are taken off the market by landlords. The city estimates that 5,470 rent-controlled units have been lost since 2005 largely due to Ellis Act evictions and owner move-ins. Additionally, the cost of building a new affordable unit has increased to between $600,000 to $750,000, while buying an existing unit from an owner usually costs between $150,000 and $400,000. In the past six months, the city has been attempting to buy out affordable units on a small scale to address the cost difference, buying up rent control buildings at risk of conversion or eviction through the mayor's "small sites program." O.C. Mismanaged $2 Billion in Property in Mello-Roos Districts A new grand jury concluded that Orange County's 119 Mello-Roos taxing districts worth more than $2 billion have been mismanaged and have poor oversight. While the districts were created to surpass the restrictions of Proposition 13 — allowing homebuilders to build needed infrastructure in the area without charging more for homes — the grand jury concluded that there are no mechanisms in place to ensure that the taxes are properly spent, and it recommend that the districts form an oversight committee to see how the taxes are managed. The report comes in the midst of a surge in home construction in Orange County that's relying on Mello-Roos districts — with Irvine forming a $384 million district and Santa Margarita Water District authorizing a $70 million district — to pay for public amenities without tacking the cost onto the price of the homes. Homeowners, however, have increasingly become upset by huge Mello-Roos bills in developments like San Clemente's Talega. Los Angeles Metro to Restructure Countywide Bus Service Los Angeles's Metro is considering  a systemwide restructuring that would speed up and slim down its bus lines, possibly cutting services to some of the least-used routes. The proposal, recommended by a commission convened by Metro, centers around increasing ridership by creating reliably frequent buses that arrive every 15 minutes. The buses also would travel faster, as the plan would increase the amount of passengers allowed on each bus, some stops would be eliminated, and it would cut services to some of the least-used corridors in the system. The draft policy will be taken to the Metro Board of Directors in July 2015. S.F. Activists Push for Development Moratorium; Short-Term Rental Restrictions San Francisco advocacy groups have filed two separate petitions aimed at pumping the brakes on San Francisco's booming housing development. In one petition, volunteers submitted 15,000 signatures to the Department of Elections, effectively putting a housing moratorium in San Francisco's Mission District on the November ballot. Activists say that the moratorium, which calls for an 18-month stop for demolition and construction in the district, is necessary to preserve housing and industrial spaces and to rethink the rapid development of the historically-Latino neighborhood. Additionally, advocates against short-term rentals submitted almost 16,000 signatures supporting a ballot measure that would put more restrictions on the city's short-term rental market, popularized by websites like Airbnb. The petition, sponsored by ShareBetter SF, would further enhance a measure that the Board of Supervisors adopted in October allowing home sharers to offer their rentals for 90 days a year without being present, or 265 days a year if they are. The petition asked the city and county to limit rentals to 75 nights per year, to fine companies like Airbnb and VRBO for listing unregistered units, and to force home sharers to regularly report their rentals. LAFCO Declines to Consolidate High Desert Districts The San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission  decided  not to consolidate community service districts in the Barstow area amidst widespread opposition at public hearings last year. Investigations of the districts in Yermo, Daggett, and Newberry Springs followed a 2013 Grand Jury report identifying numerous issues related to governance, accounting, and financial management in the areas. While it did not decide to consolidate the CSDs, the LAFCO will continue to monitor progress of the districts.

The California State Transportation Agency announced (pdf) recipients of $224 million in grant money to support public transportation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This year's recipients would reduce an estimated 860,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases by taking 180,000 cars off the road, and 93 percent of the projects would benefit disadvantaged communities, according to the CSTA. Among 14 projects, the grant money will be used to improve service on the Los Angeles basin light rail and the Bay Area light rail, expand San Diego trolley service, improve Monterey and Salinas bus service, launch a new Orange county rapid bus route, and improve local transit transfers to and from the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner. Over 90 percent of projects serve disadvantaged communities. In total, the grants support $720 million in total investments and will, according to estimates, reduce annual carbon emissions by 860,000 metric tons. Grants are funded by the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund using proceeds from the state's cap-and-trade auctions.   The grant funding is part of the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, implemented by CTC in coordination with the California Department of Transportation and California Air Resources Board. The grants help reduce greenhouse gas emissions by expanding public transportation ridership and capacity.  California Reduced Carbon Emissions in 2013 According to newly analyzed data , California managed to decrease its carbon dioxide emissions by 0.3 percent in 2013. The decline came despite major factors that contributed to carbon emissions: an economic growth rate of 2 percent, the shuttering of hydroelectric dams due to the drought, and the closure of the San Onofre nuclear power plant. Though the state still pumped almost 460 million metric tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, state officials consider the decrease a victory as the amount of renewable power generated within the state surged, with wind power production jumping 32 percent and solar rising 13 percent in 2013. First Phase of Alameda Air Station Conversion Approved Eighteen years worth of attempts to convert Alameda's former naval air station for civilian use have finally come to fruition, as the City Council there approved the first phase of construction of 800 housing units and 60,000 square feet of commercial space on the site. The development had been held up partly because of the 2008 recession and partly because of Measure A banning construction of apartment buildings in the city, which city officials worked around by increasing the number of affordable housing units on the project. That decision also gained favor with the Navy, which had previously turned down the city of Oakland's proposal to develop the former Oak Knoll Naval Hospital into a luxury golf course because it didn't provide a broad public benefit. Work at the air base is expected to lay the foundation for the development of nearly 900 acres of bay front property over the next 25 years, Jennifer Ott, the chief operating officer for the city's project at Alameda Point,  told  the San Francisco Chronicle. Upland General Plan Update Draws Criticism City leaders in the city of Upland have received sharp rebukes from residents  over its draft update to the city's general plan, with residents accusing the City Council of holding secret meetings, padding its pensions, and attempting to rubber stamp proposed updates to the plan. Residents are concerned about proposals in the plan to increase housing density in anticipation of the population growing from 75,000  81,462 by 2035, potentially constraining the city's water supply and changing the character of the city. "This is not an unchangeable document right now," Councilwoman Carol Timm said at a City Council meeting, according to the Daily Bulletin . "It is not set in stone, and we have not voted on the document, it is a draft document." L.A. May Revive Digital Billboards The Los Angeles City Council is considering reintroducing digital billboards in special districts throughout the city after they went dark because of a judicial order several years ago. Lawmakers are considering allowing two dozen districts to designate specific areas for the digital signs, along with a special permitting process that could allow sign companies to place the billboards outside of the districts. While some community members have complained about the harsh glare and blinking displays from the signs, some officials -- including several San Fernando Valley councilmembers -- contend that they could revitalize struggling commercial areas. Rail Authority Seeks Private Funding The California High-Speed Rail Authority has issued a "request for expressions of interest" to private industry, seeking to augment funds for its high speed rail with currently-nonexistent private investment on the $68 billion project. The request seeks input on how businesses believe they can best participate in financing, building and delivering a ready-to-operate system of electric passenger trains by the early 2020s. The agency currently envisions seeking a developer to design, build, finance, and maintain its "initial operating segment," a 300-mile stretch from Merced to Burbank, in exchange for a 25- to 50-year schedule of "availability payments" in the form of cap-and-trade money to repay the developer's capital investment. The agency currently has about $6 billion available from Prop. 1A and federal transportation funds. Reports Describe Inequitable Impacts of Housing Shortage A pair of new reports highlight the housing woes that Californians are facing even after the state has recovered from the economic recession of 2009. The first report, a survey of 80 community-based nonprofits by the California Reinvestment Coalition , found that spiking rents are forcing out long-term tenants throughout the state while 77 percent of nonprofits believe that potential homebuyers almost always lose out to institutional investors -- able to purchase homes in cash and financed by Main Street banks -- when trying to buy a lender-owned property. "As a nonprofit, we had a grant awarded to us through HUD's Neighborhood Stabilization Program," Lori Gay, president and CEO of Neighborhood Housing Services of Los Angeles County said in the report. "We got $60 million, which has really helped us to compete. But even with all of that cash, we still get outbid by investors — sometimes before the properties are even placed on the market."  The second report from the ACLU, titled " A Tale of Two Recoveries: Economic Recoveries for Black and White Homeowners ,"  highlights that, while both black and white families suffered in the economic recession, median white household wealth has stopped falling while median black household wealth has continued to drop by an additional 13 percent between 2009 and 2011. The report points to various factors affecting the disparity, including that black families had a larger proportion of their wealth in home equity before the quality, and that black Americans were far more likely to receive costly predatory loans during the subprime boom. California Species Considered for Endangered List The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has taken steps to possibly list four new California species under the Endangered Species Act. A review has determined that there is substantial evidence to warrant in-depth reviews of populations of the Western spadefoot toad of the Central Valley, the Relictual slender salamander in the lower Kern River Canyon, the Kern Canyon slender salamander in the lower Kern River Canyon, and the Foothill yellow-legged frog of the Upper San Gabriel River. Factors prompting the review are habitat losses, inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms, and pollution, among other factors. L.A. Seeks to Improve Ellis Act Enforcement Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Housing Committee of the City Council Chair Gil Cedillo introduced a motion to improve enforcement in the Ellis Act, which allows properties with rent stabilization to be removed from the rental market. The motion would close a loophole wherein landlords have been able to evict tenants using the Ellis Act by ensuring that property owners follow the City's Rent Stabilization Ordinance which requires that "Ellissed" properties being re-rented or rebuilt within five years provide housing at affordable levels.  CARB Holds Symposium on Transportation and Carbon Emissions Three of California's major public agencies on transportation and the environment along with experts in the field will conduct a joint symposium to discuss ways to transform California's transportation system to conform with Governor Jerry Brown's order to reduce California's use of petroleum by 50 percent by 2030. The symposium will take place July 8, and it will consist of the Air Resources Board, the California Transportation Agency, and the California Department of Transportation. The agenda is posted here: http://arb.ca.gov/cc/pillars/transportation/agenda.pdf .

Following the recommendations of its staff, the Strategic Growth Council formally approved $122 million in grants for 28 projects designed to provide affordable housing and reduce carbon emissions throughout the state. This is the inaugural awarding of funds through the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities grant program, which is administered jointly by the SGC and Department of Housing and Community Development. Recommended projects , which consist of affordable housing projects, totally 2,000 units, and other transit-oriented developments throughout the state, were announced ten days ago by SGC staff. Projects were selected based on a predetermined set of criteria, including potential for greenhouse gas reduction, project readiness, and promotion of other state policy goals related to compact development and active transportation.  SGC Chair Ken Alex said in a statement that the grants would "help provide housing, improve transportation and transportation options, benefit disadvantaged communities, and most importantly, reduce greenhouse gas emissions while promoting a broad array of worthwhile projects." This year's 28 recommended projects leverage nearly six to one in matching funds and will reduce an estimated 723,286 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions—the equivalent to taking 140,483 cars off the road for one year. The program is funded by monies from the state's cap-and-trade program. This year, the state has dedicated $832 million to programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  "California's investments are helping bolster innovative and sustainable transportation to limit greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change," said California State Transportation Agency Secretary Brian Kelly in a statement. "This year's cap and trade investments help increase access to housing that is close to reliable public transportation, a smart investment that improves overall quality of life in California." Seventy-seven percent of the projects selected are in disadvantaged communities; a significant increase over the program's required 50 percent. Stakeholders debated the definition of "disadvantaged" as the program was being devised last year. Fifty-two percent of recipients are considered transit oriented developments.  The program did not deliberately seek equity among the California's population centers. Nevertheless, the state's two largest metropolitan planning regions, the Southern California Association of Governments and the Bay Area's Metropolitan Transportation Commission, received eleven and ten awards, respectively.  At a time when communities across the state are promoting projects that conform to regional Sustainable Communities Strategies, the AHSC program is one of the only sources of funding from the state to promote SCS-friendly projects.  In a conference call last week, SGC Executive Director Mike McCoy said that many of the 56 projects that were considered for funding were credible, qualified candidates. Next year, the program will award around $400 million in grants. McCoy said that many projects that did not receive grants this year could qualify next year.  SGC and HCD staff will seek input and discuss next year's funding process at an upcoming series of workshops. The first two are July 14 in Sacramento and July 20 in Los Angeles. Resources:  Ranking of Applicants and Recommended Awardees  (pdf) Descriptions of Grant Recipients  (pdf) Map of Grant Recipients  (pdf)