HomeMy WebLinkAboutVeto Letter - AB 215 (Chiu) 09.27.2021page 1 of 2
September 27, 2021
The Honorable Gavin Newsom
California State Governor
State Capitol, First Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 215 (Chiu) – Request for Veto
Dear Governor Newsom,
On behalf of the City of Cupertino, I write to request your veto on AB 215 (Chiu),
consistent with our prior correspondence to Senator Portantino dated August 20 opposing this
legislation. This bill would provide the Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD) with additional enforcement authority for local agency violations of specified housing
laws. We have concerns related to the bill’s late‐onset amendments, which include significant
policy changes that were not considered throughout the legislative policy committee process.
There are numerous provisions included in the bill that concern us. I will not re‐hash the
concerns here that we have previously written about. Our prior correspondence is attached. One
point to note here, however, is that, procedurally, this bill, in its current form, lacks critical
consideration from policy committees due to its late amendments. If such legislation is to be
signed into law, perhaps a subsequent legislative session is the most appropriate arena – one
where late‐onset amendments do not circumvent the ability for all policy committees to consider
its provisions.
Substantively, while Cupertino is committed to adhering to state housing production
requirements and timelines, we have concerns over the necessity of this legislation when existing
authority suffices in accomplishing the goals outlined and the real necessity is a willingness to
work together rather than take actions which are worsening the housing crisis. Legislation from
the State must keep in mind that our legislators are not answerable to promoting the fiscal
interests of lobbying entities. They are answerable to the electorate through the integrity and
efficacy of their positions. We remain concerned that legislation like this is designed to look a
certain way and garner political gain while doing very little, if anything, to begin to alleviate, in
any meaningful sense, the problems being used to justify and expand this browbeating and
scapegoating.
MAYOR DARCY PAUL
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CORRESPONDENCE TO GOVERNOR NEWSOM REQUESTING TO VETO AB 215 page 2 of 2
Cupertino understands that California is experiencing a shortage of affordable housing.
We have been, and will continue to be, committed to doing our fair share and part in the
production of affordable housing in ways that do not worsen the housing crisis. However, our
State and some legislators have ushered through an influx of housing legislation that targets local
governments and puppets, on behalf of moneyed interests, a lobbyist‐asserted lack of compliance
against select scapegoats such as our City, where commercial office development is highly
lucrative. As a result, as we have seen in Cupertino, private profits increase and the housing crisis
worsens when office projects are pushed through under a ministerial review process not subject
to public scrutiny. Some housing is entitled as a result, but vast amounts of commercial and
particularly office space also becomes entitled automatically, and this latter space amplifies the
need for housing by whole numbers greater than the housing from the same project. Lobbying
for laws like this, while invoking the housing crisis, is in fact making that housing crisis worse,
to help facilitate profit‐mongering and scapegoating. How is this behavior ethical or justified?
We ask this question again. Why does the Legislature, and in this case, the Governor’s
office, not instead focus upon working with willing and capable jurisdictions such as ours to solve
the housing crisis? Instead, work with us and help us find ways of providing funding for putting
into effect housing mandates. It is curious that some State‐level proposed legislation seems more
intent upon following the directives and imperatives of well‐moneyed interests and attacking
jurisdictions where those interests are seeking to make more money. We invite the Governor’s
office, instead, to sit down with us to think through and solve these problems.
The City of Cupertino is committed to doing our part in the effort to generate more
housing and particularly more affordable housing without making the housing crisis worse. We
do not believe that AB 215 will further the objective of providing quality housing opportunities
to our community and the larger public. For the reasons discussed in this letter and our prior
correspondence, we request that you veto AB 215.
Sincerely,
Darcy Paul
Mayor
City of Cupertino
cc: Senator Dave Cortese
Assemblymember Evan Low
Assemblymember Marc Berman
Ronda Paschal, Deputy Legislative Secretary, Office of Governor Newsom
Enc: Correspondence to Senator Portantino Opposing AB 215
page 1 of 3
August 20, 2021
The Honorable Anthony Portantino
California State Senator, 25th District
State Capitol, Room 5050
Sacramento CA 95814
RE: AB 215 (Chiu) – OPPOSE
Dear Senator Portantino,
On behalf of the City of Cupertino, I write to express our opposition to AB 215 (Chiu),
which would create a new, mid‐cycle regional housing needs progress determination and
consultation process between the Housing and Community Development Department (HCD)
and local governments that have insufficient housing production. While the City is committed
to adhering to state housing production requirements and timelines, we have concerns over the
necessity of this legislation when existing authority suffices in accomplishing the goals outlined.
Not meeting the revised relative progress determination standards will result in punishment
when a community is pursuing numerous avenues to ramp up housing production to meet
state requirements. At the same time, legislation from the State must keep in mind that our
Legislators are not answerable to promoting the fiscal interests of interested entities. They are
answerable to the electorate through the integrity and efficacy of their positions. We remain
concerned that legislation like this is designed to look a certain way and garner political gain
while doing very little, if anything, to, in reality, even begin to alleviate in any meaningful sense
the problems being used to justify browbeating and scapegoating.
With regard to the specifics of how we are going about doing our part to work on the
problem of housing, our City is currently planning how to accommodate the ambitious housing
targets for the 2023‐2031 RHNA cycle, wherein housing production must be increased nearly
fivefold from previous targets. We are concerned with the bill’s provision that establishes a
“relative‐progress” metric to compel mid‐cycle consultations with jurisdictions whose housing
progress is less than half of the relative progress for the median jurisdiction affiliated with the
council of governments. While we appreciate that this provision has been amended to narrow
the scope of the metric, we fear that the Association of Bay Area Governments’ (ABAG) total
number of required units for the upcoming RHNA cycle (441,000), will place our City in a
compromised position that will result in punishment as we diligently plan for new
developments.
MAYOR DARCY PAUL
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CORRESPONDENCE TO SENATOR PORTANTINO OPPOSING AB 215 page 2 of 3
The City understands that California is experiencing a shortage of affordable housing.
We have been, and will continue to be, committed to meet production goals. However, the
influx of housing legislation that targets local governments and their perceived lack of
compliance is difficult to keep pace with and can be redundant to existing laws. While we
appreciate the author’s recent amendments, AB 215 provides another state housing mandate
that we fear will punish and add additional onerous processes to our existing housing planning
and development actions. Instead of trying to find people and other entities to blame, why does
the Legislature not instead focus upon working with willing and capable jurisdictions such as
ours? Where is the provision of funding for putting into effect these types of mandates? It is
curious that some State‐level proposed legislation seem more intent upon following the
directives and imperatives of well‐moneyed interests rather than sitting down with us to think
through and solve these problems. Enough is enough. Work for better legislation, or good
communities will come around to the basic fact that our State is simply not being served by
people whose apparent methodology involves pre‐emptively calculating who and how they
will attack, irrespective of the merit of respective positions. Legislation needs to be designed to
produce actual solutions rather than creating a punitive regime in the presence of people who
would be willing partners if only afforded the basic courtesy of a conversation, as opposed to
finger‐pointing at the behest of those who were never elected to represent the interests of the
people. Stop it with this so‐called legislation. We are working in good faith to serve the
unhoused and provide affordable units, but efforts like this are completely disrespectful and
counter‐productive. The marvel is that good people have allowed it to go this far.
Additionally, this bill would punish cities for production issues that are beyond our
control. While cities, through their planning processes, can facilitate housing, we do not
produce housing. Developers produce housing, and their goals and objectives are often not
aligned with the objectives of public agencies. For example, in our most recent RHNA cycle, the
City of Cupertino identified and zoned five sites within the city that were suitable for housing.
Additionally, the City worked with developers and ultimately approved projects for each of the
housing sites that had been identified. To date, four of the five projects have not been
completed due to various dynamics that have resulted in the developers determining that
commencing construction is not in their best interest. Under the provisions of AB 215, the City
could be found to be deficient in our housing element, even though we have met our
responsibilities for zoning and approving projects, because of financial decisions that are made
by private developers. The State Legislature needs to stand with local communities which are
the ones like ours working to deliver inclusionary zoning. When the body or elements of it
provide the impression that play‐ball politics, delivered with glib sincerity but packaged in, in
actuality, kick‐the‐can‐down‐the‐road problems, can be effectively lobbied for and bought in
the halls of our State Capitol, this is what truly undermines the efforts of those at the local level.
We are not sound bites for people who are not doing the work locally to use in order to advance
political, personal and monetary interests. Please stop as well giving the impression that the
monetary needs of an entity can simply be a balance‐sheet calculation. There is such a thing as
efficacy and ethics. In the end, it is a sad state of things when we must ask of supposedly
MAYOR DARCY PAUL
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CORRESPONDENCE TO SENATOR PORTANTINO OPPOSING AB 215 page 3 of 3
higher‐level government actors that they not interfere with the good things that we are trying to
do while helping profit‐mongering interests with their spin and smear. But for us, that is
precisely what we have to do, and what has been done to us. It is shameful, and very frankly we
have had enough of it. We have met our RHNA entitlements in good faith, but actions such as
this and similar ones over the years have woven a false narrative which, frankly, is helping no
one at all. To solve the problem of housing, we need clarity and we need integrity. Please help
us act in both manners, or at the very least, don’t be part of the problem.
This bill fails to consider the variable costs of building affordable housing in many cities.
HCD should provide data on the building costs for each city and the amount of funding each
city receives. Some cities have higher building costs, which makes it extremely expensive for
developers to build all of the required affordable housing units. For example, the Veranda in
Cupertino is a 19‐unit affordable housing development for seniors that cost over $600,000 per
unit that measures only about 350 square feet. In order to build over 1,800 affordable housing
units, the City would need millions for assistance.
As well, the way we ensure our future and the future of the next generations is to build
transit infrastructure for the next hundred years. Is what is being done here designed to do that
as well? These are expensive propositions. Work with us and get something done. Finger‐point
at good people working in good faith for solutions, and more of the same is going to happen.
The City of Cupertino is committed to meeting our housing production goals, but we do
not believe that AB 215 will further our objective of providing quality housing opportunities to
our community. For these reasons we must oppose this measure and ask for real partnership.
Sincerely,
Darcy Paul
Mayor
City of Cupertino
cc: Senator Dave Cortese
Assemblymember Evan Low
Assemblymember Marc Berman
Senate Appropriations Committee
Senator Patricia Bates, Vice Chair
Senator Steven Bradford
Senator Brian Jones
Senator Sydney Kamlager
Senator John Laird
Senator Bob Wieckowski