Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
CC, PC, HC 04-27-2021 Item No. 1 Housing Element Study Session_Late Written Communications04-27-2021
City Council, Planning
Commission and
Housing Commission
Joint Study Session #1
Housing Element
Update
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Joseph Fruen <jrfruen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 27, 2021 6:17 PM
To:City Clerk; Deborah L. Feng; Kirsten Squarcia; Darcy Paul; Jon Robert Willey; Liang Chao; Hung Wei;
Kitty Moore; R Wang; Vikram Saxena; Sanjiv Kapil; Muni Madhdhipatla; Steven Scharf; Govind
Tatachari; Tessa Parish; Sue Bose; Connie Cunningham; Siva Gandikota
Subject:Joint Housing Element Study Session - April 27, 2021
Attachments:HCD_affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Mayor Paul, Members of the City Council and Commissioners:
The staff report and the materials supplied by Baird and Driskell Community Planning noted some factors to consider
with respect to AB 686 and the mandate that Cupertino affirmatively further fair housing in its Housing Element process.
Today, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) published guidelines for the purpose
of interpreting and implementing AB 686. They are intended to improve the socio‐economic and racial integration of
communities across California so that we can better fulfill the American promise of opportunity for all. I have attached a
copy herewith. I ask that you consider them carefully so that Cupertino can meet both the moment and the guidelines'
requirements and become a place of genuine inclusion.
Many thanks,
J.R. Fruen
Cupertino resident
California Department of Housing
and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements
(April 2021 Update)
California Department of Housing
and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements
(April 2021 Update)
Housing & Community Development
2020 W. El Camino Avenue | Sacramento, CA 95833
Phone: 916-743-2244
State Housing and Community Development Department | Housing Policy Division
Forward By Director Velasquez
2 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
April is fair housing month, and April 2021 marks a momentous time in the
recent history of fair housing in America. Racial and economic inequity have
been catapulted to the forefront of public discourse through the lenses of a
deadly pandemic and ongoing structural racism, clearly capturing which of
our neighbors are affected most, and why. For the well-being of our state, it is vital that we maintain
a sharp focus on addressing the challenges we face in achieving racial equity and opportunity for all
Californians.
President Joe Biden is following through with his early commitment to make racial equity and fair
housing advancement a cornerstone of his administration’s policy and has committed to reinstate the
2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule and the 2013 Disparate Impact rule. California also
recognizes and fully commits to addressing the role that public policy – at all levels of government –
played in creating the patterns of segregation and racially concentrated areas of poverty that we see
in our state today.
In 2018, California passed AB 686 as the statewide framework to affirmatively further fair housing; to
promote inclusive communities, further housing choice, and address racial and economic disparities
through government programs, policies, and operations. AB 686 is one of the most important tools
that our local jurisdictions and partners can use to address systemic racism in housing and achieve
positive impact for all Californians through public policies. AB 686 applies to all public agencies in
all activities related to housing and community development. The duty to affirmatively further fair
housing must be taken with the utmost diligence and cannot be ignored by any of us if it is to be
successful.
Together, we must ameliorate past actions that led to inequity. As decision-makers we must create
land-use and funding policies to increase affordable housing in high-resource neighborhoods that
have often been exclusionary and bring additional resources to traditionally under-resourced neigh-
borhoods.
Affirmatively furthering fair housing in California is about achieving better outcomes for all Califor-
nians regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status,
disability, and all other protected characteristics. These principles and requirements are necessary
in addressing the racial wealth and homeownership gap, income disparities, and unequal access to
opportunities. When everyone has better housing, health, and economic outcomes, we all do better
as a whole.
Please join HCD and the many devoted partners in promoting stronger and more inclusive, sustain-
able communities. We know that our shared struggle for racial equity is centuries in the making and
that there is more work to be done. We are honored to be part of a legacy of stepping up and making
things better, for all of us.
California Department of Housing and Community
Development
Director Gustavo Velasquez
Message Re:
AB 686 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Purpose and Acknowledgements
Purpose
This guidance memo is a more comprehensive update to the AB 686 summary of requirements in
housing element law that the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) released
April 23, 2020, which can be found at hcd.ca.gov. This guidance is meant to assist public agencies
and local governments meet AB 686 requirements. The guidance will be updated periodically in
collaboration with practitioners and stakeholders to provide additional samples and best practices.
This guidance is adopted pursuant to Department of Housing and Community Development’s
(HCD’s) general authority to provide technical assistance on the preparation of housing elements.
Local jurisdictions’ use of this guidance will support their legal obligation to comply with the duty
to affirmatively further fair housing. HCD is also cognizant of its own duty to affirmatively further fair
housing n this guidance.
Acknowledgements
The Department appreciates the contributions of the many individuals and organizations and
sincerely thanks the guidance, expertise and partnership of:
»Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
»Strategic Growth Council
»University of California, Berkeley – Center for Community Innovation, Othering and Belonging
Institute and Terner Center
»Furthering Fair Housing MIT Research Consortium
»University of Minnesota Center for Urban and Regional Affairs
»National Housing Law Project
»Western Center on Law and Poverty
»PolicyLink
»Public Advocates
»Public Interest Law Project
»California Rural Legal Assistance
»Disability Rights
»Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
»Poverty and Race Research Action Council
»Housing Rights Center
»The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
»Public Law Center
»Public Interest Advocacy
»California Housing Partnership Corporation
California Department of Housing and Community Development 3
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Forward By Director Velasquez 2
Purpose and Acknowledgements 3
Background and History of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 5
Chart 1: Summary of AB 686 Requirements 8
Overview of AB 686 Changes to Law 9
Part 1: Duty of All Public Agencies to Affirmatively
Further Fair Housing 14
All Public Agencies 16
Programs and Activities 17
Tips for Implementation 18
Part 2: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Changes
to Housing Element Law 21
Outreach 21
Assessment of Fair Housing 22
Data Sources and Using the Statewide AFFH Data Viewer 25
Site Inventory 45
Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors 49
Chart 2: Contributing Factors Relationship Between Assessment of
Fair Housing and Goals and Actions 50
Goals, Policies, and Actions 51
Part 3: Resources 57
Statute (strikeout/underline) 57
AB 686 Housing Element Compliance Checklist 62
Definitions 64
Dissimilarity and Isolation Index Formulas 67
Examples of Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues by Area 68
Sample Contributing Factors & Actions Matrix 71
Examples of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Actions 72
Sample Tables 75
List of Fair Housing Assistance Organizations 79
Bibliography 80
AFFH Rule and Assessments 80
Federal Guidance 81
Data & Maps 82
Videos 84
Books 84
Research Articles & Reports 85
Table of Contents
4 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Background and History of
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Where we call home has far-reaching impacts on our lives and futures. Home can provide us with the
building blocks to success: a sense of belonging, safety, and access to economic and social oppor-
tunities. Housing is a key determinant in whether or not people have the resources to live healthy
lives and achieve their full potential. Land use policies and planning often translate into the ability of
families to access neighborhoods of opportunity, with high-performing schools, greater availability
of jobs that afford entry to the middle class, and convenient access to transit and services. The limits
on housing choice and access experienced by people within protected classes, such as race, sexual
orientation, or disability, have far-reaching impacts on access to job opportunity, quality education,
and mental and physical health.
Residential segregation and exclusion, whether by race, ethnicity, disability, or income, is a result
of numerous housing policies, practices, and procedures—both public and private—that have had
enduring and pervasive negative impacts. Overt and covert housing discrimination through land
use policy, shifting housing markets, and patterns of investment and disinvestment, have restricted
meaningful fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity, particularly for communities of
color. Historic patterns of segregation persist in California despite the long-standing federal man-
date, established by the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (FHA), that federal agencies and federal grantees
affirmatively further the purposes of the FHA.
In the decades preceding and since the passage of the FHA, government and non-governmental
policies and practices have disproportionately and unfairly impacted people and communities. Ram-
pant exclusionary tactics and disparate treatment such as redlining, racially restrictive covenants, and
biased mortgage lending practices were a few of the methods in the housing system that federal,
state, and local lawmakers developed or explicitly supported to encourage spatial inequality based
on race. State-sponsored, racially explicit practices fostered economic inequality and created a sys-
tematic wealth gap, as some groups were excluded from accessing homeownership and thereby
denied the ability to create intergenerational wealth through investments in real estate.
In 1968, the FHA was enacted to remedy significant and long-standing inequities borne by protected
classes, particularly Black and Hispanic people. As amended in subsequent years, the FHA mandates
broad protections, prohibiting housing discrimination based upon race, color, religion, sex, disability,
familial status, or national origin. Importantly, it advances the need to go beyond prohibiting housing
discrimination and create opportunities for real housing choice through affirmatively furthering fair
housing.1
1 The Fair Housing Act of 1968 originally only protected against discrimination based on race, color, religion, and national origin. The FHA was
later amended in 1974 to include sex and then again in 1988 to include discrimination based on disability and familial status.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 5
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Although federal mandates prohibit overt forms of discrimination in housing, forces driving residen-
tial segregation have persisted, sometimes taking on new forms to achieve the same discriminatory
ends. Racially explicit practices were subtly replaced by race-neutral methods to exclude people
of color from predominantly white neighborhoods. Over time, single-family zoning emerged and
replaced race-based zoning as a tool for segregating communities by restricting more affordable
housing options, such as apartments or condominiums. Exclusionary zoning policies have made
it difficult for lower-income residents to access certain communities and in turn has had a discrimi-
natory effect on protected characteristics such as race, disability, and familial status. Furthermore,
federal, state, and local subsidized programs failed to construct affordable housing in high-resource
neighborhoods, which are disproportionately white, thereby reinforcing the spatial segregation of
low-income communities of color.2
Past and present discriminatory policies and practices, including long-term disinvestment, have
resulted in neighborhoods with concentrated poverty and poor housing stock, limited access to
opportunity, unsafe environmental conditions, underfunded schools, dilapidated infrastructure, and
other disproportionately experienced problems. In addition, governmental policies have subsidized
the development of segregated, high-resourced suburbs in metropolitan areas by constructing
new highway systems—often through lower income communities of color— to ensure access to job
opportunities in urban centers. This physical and policy infrastructure supports patterns of discrim-
ination and high levels of segregation that continue to persist in California and across the country.
All of these conditions persist despite the over 50-year-old obligation to prohibit discrimination and
affirmatively further fair housing.
2 As of 2017, the State of California had 391 racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP) areas, which represents a notable
40 percent increase from the 278 R/ECAP areas documented in 2010. Between 2000, when the state had 182 R/ECAP areas, and 2017,
California has seen a 115 percent increase in R/ECAP areas (Final 2020 Analysis of Impediments (AI), p. 165).
Housing policy, program guidelines, and regulations were essential in creating current
inequities, and they are equally important in both preventing further segregation
and concentration of poverty, as well as increasing access to opportunity. In order to
ameliorate past actions that led to inequity, decision-makers must create land-use and
funding policies to increase affordable housing in high resource neighborhoods that
have often been exclusionary (explicitly or in effect of costs and zoning policies) and
bring additional resources to traditionally under-resourced neighborhoods.
6 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
To address these conditions, Assembly Bill 686 (AB 686), signed in 2018, establishes an indepen-
dent state mandate that expands the duty of all California’s public agencies to affirmatively further
fair housing (AFFH). AB 686 added to existing protections in California. The Fair Employment and
Housing Act (FEHA) provides broad protections to California residents, prohibiting housing dis-
crimination through public or private land-use practices, decisions, and authorizations based upon
“race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital
status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, or genetic information.”3
Also, Government Code section 65008 prohibits discrimination against affordable housing based
on financing or occupancy by low- and moderate-income households. With the passage of AB 686,
state and local public agencies are required to affirmatively further fair housing through deliberate
action to explicitly address, combat, and relieve disparities resulting from past and current patterns
of segregation to foster more inclusive communities. Importantly, AB 686 also creates new housing
element requirements applying to all housing elements due to be revised on or after January 1, 2021.
These requirements include an assessment of fair housing practices, an analysis of the relationship
between available sites and areas of high or low resources, and concrete actions in the form of pro-
grams to affirmatively further fair housing. The purpose of this assessment and analysis is to replace
segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns and to transform racially
and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP) into areas of opportunity. The purpose of this
memo is to assist in that assessment and analysis.
3 Gov. Code, §§ 12900-12996.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 7
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Chart 1: Summary of AB 686 Requirements
8 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
California Department of Housing and Community Development 9
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Overview of AB 686 Changes to Law
AB 686 (Chapter 958, Statutes of 2018) makes changes to laws in two broad areas:
1. Duty of All Public Agencies to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
2. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Changes to Housing Element Law
Duty of All Public Agencies to Affirmatively Further Fair
Housing
Existing federal law requires departments and agencies to administer programs relating to housing
in a way that affirmatively furthers fair housing.4 These obligations extend to state and local govern-
ments that receive funds or contract with the federal government. For example, a local government
receiving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars directly from the federal government
is obligated to affirmatively further fair housing; under federal law this included completing an as-
sessment of fair housing to inform the consolidated plan. However, federal planning requirements
are subject to shifting promulgation of laws through various mechanisms such as regulations, rules,
and program guidelines.5
As of January 1, 2019, AB 686 extends the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing to all public
agencies in the State of California. This affirmative duty is not limited to those agencies with rela-
tionships with the federal government and is to be broadly applied throughout agencies at the state
and local level.6 Now, all public agencies must both (1) administer programs and activities relating
to housing and community development in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing, and (2)
take no action inconsistent with this obligation. Affirmatively furthering fair housing means “taking
meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation
and foster inclusive communities.” 7 These new statutory obligations charge all public agencies with
broadly examining their existing and future policies, plans, programs, rules, practices, and related
activities and make proactive changes to promote more inclusive communities. 8
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Changes to
Housing Element Law
Even prior to the passage of AB 686, Housing Element Law inherently promoted more inclusive com-
munities, such as by addressing the disproportionate housing needs of lower income households,
and households with special needs (e.g., persons with disabilities, elderly, large households, single
4 See Executive Order 12892 – Leadership and Coordination of Fair Housing in Federal Programs: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
January 17, 1994.
5 Effective September 8, 2020, HUD replaced the final AFFH rule with the Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice rule
[federalregister.gov]. Under the new rule entities are not required to complete a fair housing assessment (AFH or AI). They must AFFH, which
has been redefined to read as, “means to take any action rationally related to promoting any attribute or attributes of fair housing as defined
in the preceding subsection” (24 C.F.R. §5.150 (2020)).
6 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(2).
7 Id., subd. (a)(1).
8 Id., subds. (a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c), and (d).
10 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
parent households, farmworkers, and people experiencing homelessness).9 For example, Housing
Element Law requires local governments to make diligent efforts to include all segments of the
community in public participation. Housing Element Law requires specific analysis of persons and
households with special needs and commensurate development of policies and programs.10 Housing
Element Law, among many other things, also requires zoning for a variety of housing choices, the
identification of sites to accommodate the housing needs of all incomes, and specific programs to
promote fair housing.11
AB 686 makes changes to Housing Element Law to ensure the long-standing duty to affirmatively
further fair housing is part of the housing element of the general plan,12 which is the fundamental
guiding document for community development for all local governments.13
Major changes include:
Outreach and Capacity
The preparation, adoption, and implementation of a housing element requires a diligent effort to
include all economic segments of the community.14 AB 686 reinforces and builds on this requirement.
Under AB 686 and changes to Housing Element Law, the housing element must also include a sum-
mary of fair housing outreach and capacity.15 The element must describe meaningful, frequent, and
ongoing community participation, consultation, and coordination that is integrated with the broader
stakeholder outreach and community participation process for the overall housing element.16
Outreach plans should consider geographic barriers to participation, especially in geographically ex-
tensive jurisdictions and rural areas, and should plan to hold in-person meetings in various locations to
ensure residents from across the jurisdiction have the opportunity to participate. Jurisdictions should
seek sites that are transit-accessible and/or consider options to assist residents without vehicle ac-
cess with transportation.17 Meetings should be held outside of work hours, including on evenings and
weekends, to facilitate participation.18 Drafts of the housing element should be made available to the
public for review and comment with ample time before submission to the Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) for review. In-person and electronic options for participation should
also be made available. Also, housing element outreach should be aligned with the SB 1000 (2016)
9 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (a)(1), (a)(7); HCD, Building Blocks, at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-
blocks/index.shtml.
10 Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (a)(7), (c).
11 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(4), (c)(1).
12 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).
13 DeVita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763, 772–773 (“general plan … remains, a ‘constitution’ for future development”); Lesher
Communications, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 540 (general plan is located at the top of “the hierarchy of local
government law regulating land use”).
14 Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).
15 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A)(i).
16 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg.
42271, 42292-42302, 42353-42360, esp. 42354-42356 (July 16, 2015).
17 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42353-42360, esp.
42354-42356 (July 16, 2015); HCD, Building Blocks, Public Participation at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-
blocks/getting-started/public-participation.shtml.
18 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42292-42302, 42353-
42360, esp. 42354-42356 (July 16, 2015); HCD, Building Blocks, Public Participation at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/
building-blocks/getting-started/public-participation.shtml.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 11
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
(Environmental Justice Element)19 outreach to the extent possible, given the overlapping topic areas.
Examples of key stakeholders:
●Community-based and other organizations (CBOs) that represent protected class members
●Public housing authorities
●Housing and community development providers
●Lower income community members and households that include persons in protected classes
●Fair housing agencies
●Independent living centers
●Regional centers
●Homeless services agencies
●Churches and community service organizations that serve ethnic/linguistic minorities
Important components of meaningful engagement:
●Translation of materials and making translation available at meetings
●Working with CBOs and other community stakeholders to develop effective outreach and en-
gagement plans
●Making accessible information materials that avoid use of overly technical language
●Offering mini-grants to CBOs and other stakeholders to assist with engagement of low-income
households and protected classes
Assessment of Fair Housing: Summary of Issues and Analysis of Patterns,
Trends, and Disproportionate Housing Needs
The housing element now incorporates planning and analysis which is collectively referred to as an
assessment of fair housing (AFH),20 which generally includes:
●A summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair
housing enforcement and outreach capacity; and
●An analysis and summary of fair housing issues utilizing available federal, state, and local data and
knowledge. The analysis must include a variety of factors, such as trends and patterns within the
locality and in comparison to the broader region, and the analysis must address:
»Integration and segregation;
»Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty;
»Disparities in access to opportunity, including for persons with disabilities; and
»Disproportionate housing needs (this may include things like overpayment, overcrowding,
housing conditions disproportionately affecting protected classes), including displacement
risk.
19 Gov. Code, § 65302, subd. (h).
20 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42292-42302, 42343-42344, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015).
12 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Site Inventory
Prior to AB 686, Housing Element Law required jurisdictions to inventory and identify adequate sites
appropriately zoned and available to accommodate its Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA).21
The housing element must demonstrate that there are adequate sites zoned for the development of
housing for households at each income level sufficient to accommodate the number of new housing
units needed at each income level as identified in the RHNA.22
AB 686 now requires that a jurisdiction identify sites throughout the community in a manner that is
consistent with its duty to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) and the findings of its assessment
of fair housing, pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c)(10)(A).23 In the context
of AFFH, the site identification requirement involves not only an analysis of site capacity to accom-
modate the RHNA, but also whether the identified sites serve the purpose of replacing segregated
living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity.24
Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors
Existing Housing Element Law requires various analyses, such as a housing needs assessment, housing
needs of persons with special needs, housing conditions, potential governmental and non-govern-
mental constraints, site inventory to accommodate the projected housing need (i.e., regional housing
need allocation), and identification of units at risk of converting to market-rate uses.25 Each of these
analyses inform the goals, policies and schedule of actions to address the existing and projected
housing needs over the planning period.26 AB 686 advances this same framework and requires link-
ing analysis with policy and action formulation. AB 686 requires an identification and prioritization of
contributing factors to fair housing issues based on all the previously required analysis (outreach, fair
housing assessment, site inventory).27 This identification and prioritization must give highest priority
to factors that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity or negatively impact fair
housing or civil rights. 28
Goals and Actions
Existing Housing Element Law requires programs with a schedule of actions with timelines and spe-
cific commitment to have a “beneficial impact” within the planning period to achieve the goals and
objectives of the housing element. Programs must address various statutorily mandated areas, such
as identification of adequate sites, zoning for a variety of types, assisting development for lower
and moderate income households, addressing governmental and non-governmental constraints,
21 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (a)(3); HCD, Building Blocks, at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/
index.shtml.
22 Ibid.
23 Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (a).
24 Gov. Code, § 8890.50. subd. (b).
25 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a); HCD, Building Blocks, at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/index.
shtml.
26 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (b), (c); HCD, Building Blocks, at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/
index.shtml.
27 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A)(iii); Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subds. (a)(1), (b).
28 See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A)(iv).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 13
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
conserving the existing housing stock, preserving at-risk units, and promoting housing opportunities
for all people.29 AB 686 builds upon these program requirements, including modifying the existing
program requirement to promote fair housing opportunities to now include actions that promote
and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community
or communities for all persons. As part of this requirement, the housing element now requires an
identification of priorities and goals based on identified contributing factors that limit or deny fair
housing choice or access to opportunity, or that negatively impact fair housing or civil rights com-
pliance.30 Similar to the existing Housing Element Law, AB 686 also requires identification of metrics
or quantified objectives and milestones for determining what fair housing results will be achieved.31
Strategies and actions to implement priorities and goals may include, but are not limited to:
●Enhancing mobility strategies and promoting inclusion for protected classes
●Encouraging development of new affordable housing in high-resource areas
●Implementing place-based strategies to encourage community revitalization, including preserva-
tion of existing affordable housing
●Protecting existing residents from displacement
These actions, taken together, must significantly address disparities in housing needs and in access to
opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns,
transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, fostering
and maintaining compliance with civil rights; and must affirmatively further fair housing.
Consistency with the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule
The passage of AB 686 in 2018 enshrined the duty to affirmatively further fair housing within Cal-
ifornia state law, regardless of future federal actions. California’s law essentially preserves the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Final Rule as published in the Federal Register in 2015.32 This was done to ensure the 2015 AFFH Final
Rule remained the law in California, despite the potential federal rollback of the rule and tool. (The
2015 rule was suspended in 2018 and ultimately terminated in 2020.) State law is clear, California’s
AFFH duty remains regardless of subsequent amendment, suspension, or revocation of the 2015
AFFH Final Rule.
29 Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c).
30 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42353-
42360, esp. 42358 (July 16, 2015).
31 Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (c)(10)(A)(iv).
32 Per Government Code section 8899.50, subdivision (c), the section shall be interpreted consistent with the AFFH Final Rule and
accompanying commentary as published by HUD in volume 80 of the Federal Register, Number 136, pages 42272 to 42371, inclusive, dated
July 16, 2015. Note that, at times, this document cites to the 2016 the Code of Federal Regulations; this is because the rule adopted in July
2015 was too late to be codified in the 2015 Code and was codified in the regulations for the first time in the 2016.
14 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Part 1:
Duty of All Public Agencies
to Affirmatively Further Fair
Housing
AB 686 strengthens existing California fair housing and civil rights laws. California’s Fair Employment
and Housing Act (FEHA) provides broad protections to California residents, prohibiting housing
discrimination based upon “race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression,
sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability,
veteran or military status, or genetic information.”33 California’s Government Code section 65008
prohibits discrimination in housing based on occupation, age, or protected characteristic; method
of financing; or the intended occupancy by lower or moderate income people. While state law pro-
hibited discrimination through public or private land use practices, decisions, and authorizations
based on any of these characteristics, it had not included a state requirement to affirmatively further
fair housing. As of January 1, 2019, AB 686 creates a state mandate requiring public agencies and
jurisdictions to go beyond combating discrimination to affirmatively further fair housing.
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to
combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive commu-
nities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.
Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken
together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replac-
ing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming
racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering
and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively fur-
ther fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing
and community development. - (Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(1).)
Beyond the housing element requirements, AB 686 requires all public agencies (including, but not
limited to, all cities and counties, and housing authorities) to ensure that their housing and community
development programs and activities—taken together—affirmatively further fair housing, and that
they take no action materially inconsistent with this obligation.34
Affirmatively furthering fair housing includes taking proactive and meaningful actions that have a
33 Gov. Code, §§ 12900-12996.
34 Gov. Code, § 8890.50, subds. (a)(1), (b), (d).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 15
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
significant impact in integrating living patterns and socio-economic concentrations—well beyond
combating discrimination or mitigating disparities. Meaningful actions must be taken in concert with
each other and address all of the following: 35
1. Significant Disparities in Housing Needs and in Access to Opportunity: Examples include incen-
tivizing new residential development to include below-market rate housing; conserving affordability
of existing housing, such as limitations on rents or conversion of such housing to higher rent or
higher priced housing; encouraging systematic code enforcement activities that maintain housing
stock while ensuring such enforcement does not cause displacement; and promoting housing mo-
bility strategies and displacement mitigation strategies to ensure equitable access to opportunity.
Housing mobility strategies may include providing affordable and accessible transportation options
to enhance access to education and economic development opportunities. Displacement mitiga-
tion strategies may include tenant protections, conservation of existing stock, preservation of units
at-risk of conversion to market-rate uses, acquisition and rehabilitation of existing stock, including
naturally occurring affordable housing, and removing barriers to building affordable housing.
2. Replacing Segregated Living Patterns with Truly Integrated and Balanced Living Patterns: Ex-
amples include community benefits agreements that balance development proposals with tangible,
local benefits to residents in the area ( e.g., creating affordable housing, funding renter assistance
programs for nearby residents, or other investments that meet community-identified needs, such as
infrastructure and community amenities). Other examples include inclusionary zoning requirements
and land-value recapture mechanisms, zoning for a variety of housing types, particularly those that
may be lacking from the community or neighborhood, including: multifamily housing, low-barrier
navigation centers, group homes, supportive housing, and accessible units. Promote education on
how restrictions on multifamily housing, such as limited multifamily zoning and height and density
limitations, impact inclusive communities. Seek local input on housing proposals while recognizing
that “local vetoes” of affordable and mixed-income housing in racially segregated concentrated
areas of affluence create fair housing issues.36
3. Transforming Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) into Areas of
Opportunity: Examples include community-led, place-based strategies to revitalize communities,
such as economic development strategies and prioritizing investment in R/ECAPs that meet the
needs of existing low-income residents, such as safe routes to school, transit, parks, schools, bike and
pedestrian infrastructure, urban forestry, other neighborhood improvements; preserving naturally
occurring affordable housing, such as mobilehome parks; and preservation as affordable housing of
market-rate units where low-income households live; and promoting mixed-income development
coupled with strong anti-displacement protections. Conduct outreach and advertise city program
to persons with limited English proficiency. Other examples include community engagement in
planning processes, including targeted outreach, technical assistance to help apply for grants,
economic development strategies, workforce development, youth engagement and educational
programs, healthy food access, affordable energy, and transportation access.
35 Gov. Code, §§ 8890.50, subds. (a)(1), (b), (d), 65583, subds. (c)(5), (c)(10); AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg.
42271, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154 (2016).
36 The Internal Revenue Service Revenue Ruling 2016-29 states that the Internal Revenue Code neither forces nor encourages local approval
in decisions allocating Low Income Housing Credits, based on the concern that this practice perpetuates racial segregation. State housing
agencies are not required or encouraged to honor local vetoes.
16 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
4. Fostering and Maintaining Compliance with Civil Rights and Fair Housing Laws: Agencies must
diligently comply with civil rights and fair housing laws, including the California Fair Employment
and Housing Act (FEHA) (Part 2.8 (commencing with section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Gov-
ernment Code sections 8899.50, 65008, 65583, subdivisions (c)5) and (c)(10), and11135, Civil Code
section 51 (the Unruh Civil Rights Act), and FEHA regulations in California Code of Regulations, title
2, sections 12005-12271.
In addition to taking meaningful action, public agencies must not take any action materially incon-
sistent with the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. Examples of materially inconsistent
actions include those that:
●Hinder any of the affirmative actions public agencies take to further fair housing (e.g., lack of
enforcement of rules intended to promote fair housing choices, diminishing fair housing princi-
ples from program guidelines, and inequitable implementation or enforcement of programs and
activities)
●Perpetuate discrimination, segregation, R/ECAPs, and barriers that restrict access to opportunity
based on protected characteristics (e.g., lack of affirmative marketing in funded housing develop-
ments, excluding accessibility modifications from eligible uses in funding, absence of community
revitalization strategies in programs and policies)
●Are inconsistent with the housing element or the No-Net-Loss Law37 (e.g., downzoning without
upzoning, zoning barriers to housing choices, removing tenant protections)
●Have a disparate impact on protected classes (e.g., zoning or siting toxic or polluting land uses or
projects near a disadvantaged community, lack of investment in concentrated areas of poverty,
lack of multifamily housing or affordable housing options in high-resource areas, investment
without ant-displacement strategies in areas of disproportionate housing need)
Public agencies must ensure housing and community development programs and activities are
designed and can be reasonably expected to achieve a significant and tangible positive change
that affirmatively furthers fair housing by, for example, increasing fair housing choice or decreasing
disparities in access to opportunity.
All Public Agencies
Existing federal law requires departments and agencies to administer programs relating to housing in
a way that affirmatively furthers fair housing. These obligations apply to state and local governments
that receive funds or contract with the federal government and are often limited to housing pro-
grams. However, California Government Code section 8899.50 extends well beyond those agencies
with federal funds or contracts and includes virtually all public agencies in California.
Public agencies include all subdivisions of the state, such as officers, offices, agencies, commissions,
bureaus, boards, departments and divisions. Examples include the Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD), California Housing Finance Agency, Department of Developmental
Services, Department of Health Services, Department of Social Services, Tax Credit Allocation Com-
37 Gov. Code, § 65863.
Programs and Activities Related to Housing and Community
Development
All public agencies are required to administer programs and activities relating to housing
and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing. Housing
and community development should be broadly construed and should not be interpreted
in a limited manner. For example, an agency’s name does not need to explicitly bear the
words “housing” or “community” or “development” to have activities or programs related
to housing and community development. Any program or activities that impact housing and
community development should address the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.
Community development should be considered broadly as any processes or issues related
to community members or social and physical surroundings. Housing and community de-
velopment are not limited to housing programs and activities. For example, public agencies
with programs and activities in any way related to land use or access to opportunity based
on where a person lives pertains to community development, which in turn involves housing.
In this way, programs and activities that involve transportation, land conservation, hazard
planning, infrastructure, economic issues, public facilities, social services, coastal resources,
other environmental resources, and more should be affirmatively furthering fair housing. The
same applies to local agencies. This obligation is not limited to investment, planning, and
outreach related to housing, but also broader community development, such as infrastruc-
ture, public schools, parks and recreation, and other capital improvements.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 17
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
mittee, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, including the Strategic Growth Council, Califor-
nia Department of Transportation, California Transportation Commission, California Department of
Education, Department of Conservation, California Coastal Commission, Natural Resources Agency,
California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board, Department of
Water Resources, and many more. Public agencies also include all public housing authorities, rede-
velopment successor agencies, cities, counties, cities and counties, and charter cities and counties.38
Programs and Activities
The obligation to AFFH for public agencies applies to all housing and community development pro-
grams and activities. Programs and activities should be considered expansively and not in a manner
to limit affirmatively furthering fair housing. For example, most state agencies are involved in some
combination of planning, financial investment, regulatory function, or technical assistance, outreach
and education. All of these broad categories should be considered programs and activities. This
expansive application of programs and activities also applies to local governments. For example,
capital improvement plans, code enforcement and other regulatory functions, housing assistance
programs, and planning and zoning documents should all affirmatively further fair housing.
38 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(2).
18 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Tips for Implementation
To affirmatively further fair housing through programs and activities, public agencies should consider
a variety of factors and consult with other agencies. Agencies should also consider a process to
incorporate affirmatively furthering fair housing in programs and activities.
For example:
1. Gather and Analyze Data: To better understand affirmatively furthering fair housing, agencies
should explore available data related to the topic area to identify spatial patterns and trends and
evaluate the impacts of programs and activities. For data options, see “Part 3 Resources” or visit
HCD’s website at www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/.
2. Engage the Community: Proactively reach out to individuals and organizations that represent low-
er income households, people in protected classes, and households with special needs to develop
open and mutual communication. Solicit input and communicate on a regular and ongoing basis,
not just during formal public comment periods.
3. Assess Programs and Activities: Inventory programs and activities and explore opportunities to
affirmatively further fair housing.
4. Develop a Plan with Clear Timelines: Identify goals and actions and establish a schedule. Proac-
tively seek the public’s input on the plan and make it available prior to finalizing.
5. Implement the Plan and Monitor Progress: Assign a lead and prioritize the plan to carry out the
actions and achieve the goals. Regularly monitor (e.g., biannually) progress and make adjustments.
Engagement: Early, Often, Ongoing and More
Outreach early in the development and throughout the completion of programs and activities is
foundational to affirmatively furthering fair housing. Public agencies should seek a variety of methods
to gather input from key stakeholders, such as community-based and other organizations that include
and represent protected class members, lower income households and households with special needs
(e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, farmworkers, female-headed households
and persons experiencing homelessness), public housing authorities, community members that are
lower income, and members of protected classes.
●Early: Public agencies should involve stakeholders well before releasing drafts of programs and
in the early stages of development of other activities. This early engagement often yields better
program results and at a nimbler stage in the development of a program. Early engagement
is also key to building stronger working relationships and products that are more inclusive by
design.
●Often: Many times, the development of programs and activities at a state and local level can take
months and even years. An effective and inclusive outreach process will have multiple contact
points throughout the development.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 19
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Ongoing: Outreach should not stop after a program or activity is developed. An inclusive process
will continue outreach through marketing, technical assistance, implementation, and evaluation
of a program or activity.
●More: Outreach should employ a variety of strategies and methods to promote access (e.g.,
effective communication and reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities, and
meaningful access for persons with limited English proficiency) and consider feedback loops to
keep stakeholders and individuals informed whenever possible.
Inventory and Amend Existing Programs and Activities
Public agencies should review all programs and activities for opportunities to affirmatively further
fair housing. For state programs, example areas include planning documents, eligibility and scoring
criteria and other provisions for funding programs, geographic distribution criteria, outreach, mar-
keting and technical assistance, regulatory enforcement, and lack of exception processes. For local
programs, example areas include assessing land use and zoning policies against patterns of racial
segregation, marketing and outreach, prioritization of areas of concentrated poverty or lack of access
to opportunity, funding, capital improvements such as infrastructure investment, anti-displacement
policies, workforce development training, and economic development strategies.
Public agencies should also incorporate racial and equity inclusion into regulatory and technical
assistance functions by prioritizing assistance to combat racial segregation, foster inclusion, and
benefit areas of concentrated poverty, eliminate disparities in access to opportunity, and address
disproportionate housing need, including displacement and housing and transportation cost burden.
For example, a local government could adopt zoning and incentives for more housing choices and
affordability in higher resource areas; target resources for rehabilitation and maintenance of existing
housing and anti-displacement policies in lower resource areas; develop pathways to homeownership
for people in lower resource areas; seek to creatively engage communities; and create decision-mak-
ing opportunities for communities in low resource areas regarding outcomes for health, economic
development, planning, housing, and transportation.
Make a Schedule and Regularly Evaluate and Modify Programs
All public agencies should immediately evaluate all programs and activities for opportunities to
affirmatively further fair housing. A comprehensive evaluation and modification of programs and
activities may be time-consuming for larger agencies, especially when regulation and legal changes
are required. To address these challenges, make a schedule and allocate adequate staff time and
resources to make affirmatively furthering fair housing a deliberate and consistent effort. Also, when-
ever updates occur, ensure that equity and inclusion are considered and addressed. This will require
a thorough analysis of potential intended and unintended impacts of policy decisions on protected
class members, lower income households, households with special needs, areas of concentrated pov-
erty, lower resource areas, and areas of disproportionate housing need. Examples include updates
to regulations, guidelines, notices of funding availability, scoring rubrics, and planning document
updates such as general plans, community plans, zoning codes and capital improvement plans. En-
gaging residents and representative organizations into policy decisions is the best way to understand
the full breadth of impacts of policy change.
20 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Cultivate Values of Inclusion
Fostering inclusion in an agency’s values can have a huge impact in program and activity design.
Agencies could consider implementing a variety of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, such as
racial equity trainings, incorporating racial equity into hiring practices and promotional opportunities,
and committing to creating an organizational culture of inclusion and open communication. Making
sure that staff and leadership are better trained and consistently practicing inclusion will have an
ongoing impact throughout the processes.
A Public Agency AFFH Success: In partnership with Race Forward, the Public Health Institute,
and the California Endowment, the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) is leading a vari-
ety of activities to affirmatively further fair housing in the agency. Specifically, SGC supports the
Capitol Collaborative on Race & Equity (CCORE)—a racial equity capacity-building program
for State of California employees. CCORE builds on the success of a 2018-2019 Government
Alliance for Race and Equity Capitol Cohort pilot initiative, and offers two cohorts for partic-
ipants to receive training to learn about, plan for, and implement activities that embed racial
equity approaches into institutional culture, policies, and practices. In 2020, SGC adopted a
Racial Equity Action Plan, which outlines concrete actions that SGC is taking to achieve racial
equity in the organization’s operations, programs and policies in order to achieve its vision that
all people in California live in healthy, thriving and resilient communities regardless of race.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 21
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Part 2:
Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing Changes to Housing
Element Law
As discussed in Part 1, AB 686 requires virtually all state and local agencies (including, but not limited
to, all cities, counties, cities and counties, and housing authorities) to ensure that their laws, programs
and activities affirmatively further fair housing, and that they take no action inconsistent with this
obligation.39 In addition, AB 686 amends Housing Element Law40 to better affirmatively further fair
housing by adding several new requirements related to:
●Outreach
●Assessment of Fair Housing
●Site Inventory
●Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors
●Goals and Actions
Outreach
The preparation, adoption, and implementation of a housing element includes a diligent effort to
include public participation from all economic segments of the community.41 A diligent effort means
going beyond simply giving the public an opportunity to provide input and should be proactively
and broadly conducted through a variety of methods to assure access and participation.42 AB 686
also requires jurisdictions to include a summary of their fair housing outreach capacity.43 To address
these requirements, the housing element must describe meaningful, frequent, and ongoing public
participation with key stakeholders.44 Among others, examples of key stakeholders must include
public housing authorities, housing and community development providers, advocacy groups (lo-
cal, regional, and state level), community members who are lower income, persons and households
with special needs, members of protected classes, representative advocacy organizations and other
similarly interested parties, fair housing agencies, independent living centers, regional centers, and
39 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(2).
40 Gov. Code, § 65583, subds. (c)(5), (c)(10).
41 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9).
42 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (c)(10)(A)(i), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed.
Reg. 42271, 42353-42360 (esp. 42354-42356), 42363-42364 (July 16, 2015).
43 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (c)(10)(A)(i).
44 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (10)(A)(i), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed.
Reg. 42271, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015). See details in, for instance, 24 C.F.R. § 5.158 (2016).
22 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
homeless service agencies. The element must describe: 45
●Outreach activities intended to reach a broad audience, such as utilizing a variety of methods,
broad and proactive marketing, including targeted areas and needs, promoting language access
and accessibility for persons with disabilities (which can include effective communication, rea-
sonable accommodations, and remote participation opportunities), and consulting with relevant
organizations;
●List of organizations contacted and consulted in the process and for what purpose;
●Summary of comments and how the comments are considered and incorporated (including com-
ments that were not incorporated), particularly with changes to the housing element; and
●Summary of issues that contributed to lack of participation in the housing element process by all
economic segments, particularly people with protected characteristics, if that proves to be the case.
While localities must undertake diligent outreach efforts throughout the entire housing element
preparation, some key areas to seek input include:
●Review of Past Actions: The housing element requires a review of the previous housing element
for progress in implementation, effectiveness of programs in meeting goals, and appropriateness
of modifying programs for the current planning period. Localities should make a specific effort to
gather input from all segments of the community on the effectiveness of these programs and how
to make adjustments moving forward.
●Assessment of Fair Housing: The assessment of fair housing requires various analyses such as
segregation, integration, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs.
Localities should reach out to fair housing organizations for any available data to complement
readily available state or federal data.
●Potential Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities: Localities should seek individ-
uals and advocates for persons with disabilities to better identify barriers and promote access to
fair housing choices. Examples of agencies to reach include independent living centers, regional
centers for developmental services, information from institutions including jails and prisons, state
hospitals, etc. Disability outreach should include place-based/neighborhood-based groups and
senior groups, like area associations on aging and others, including those that serve distinct ethnic
or linguistic communities.
●Policies and Actions: Specific outreach to all segments of the community will assist and strength-
en policy formulation to result in meaningful actions that have a significant positive impact.
Assessment of Fair Housing
The housing element includes a housing needs assessment, which includes various requirements
such as analysis of household characteristics (e.g., overpayment, overcrowding), housing conditions,
and persons with special needs.46 These analyses, in turn, guide policy and action formulation. As
part of the housing needs assessment, the element is now required to include an assessment of fair
45 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (10)(A)(i), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed.
Reg. 42271, 42292-42297, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015). See details in, for instance, 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.514(d)(6), 5.158 (2016).
46 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg.
42271, 42348-42351, 42353-42360, esp. 42353-42354 (July 16, 2015).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 23
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
housing, including a summary of fair housing issues. A summary of fair housing issues is an essential
step to informing and prioritizing contributing factors and, eventually, goals and actions.
A fair housing issue is a condition in a geographic area of analysis that restricts fair housing
choice or access to opportunity, and includes such conditions as ongoing local or regional
segregation or lack of integration, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and af-
fluence, significant disparities in access to opportunity, disproportionate housing needs, and
evidence of discrimination or violations of civil rights law or regulations related to housing.
Fair housing choice means that individuals and families have the information, opportunity, and
options to live where they choose without unlawful discrimination and other barriers related to race,
color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, disability, or other protected characteristics. Fair
housing choice encompasses: (1) Actual choice, which means the existence of realistic housing op-
tions; (2) Protected choice, which means housing that can be accessed without discrimination; and
(3) Enabled choice, which means realistic access to sufficient information regarding options so that
any choice is informed. For persons with disabilities, fair housing choice and access to opportunity
include access to accessible housing and housing in the most integrated setting appropriate to an
individual’s needs as required under federal civil rights law, including equitably provided disability-re-
lated services that an individual needs to live in such housing.
Examples:
●People with mobility impairments have actual choice when realistic housing options (e.g., units
with accessible features) exist in their housing market area at an affordable cost. Persons with
disabilities who are unable to use stairs or need a zero-step shower may not have actual housing
choice without the presence of housing units with these accessibility features.
●People with lower incomes have actual choice when units that are affordable and well maintained
exist in all parts of a jurisdiction and region.
●In order for families to have protected choice they need to access housing options without
discrimination. In a 2016 housing discrimination study, researchers found that compared to
households without children, households with children were shown slightly fewer units and were
commonly told about units that were slightly larger, and as a result, slightly more expensive to
rent. This differential treatment is considered discrimination and a type of steering, which occurs
on a racial basis as well.47
●Households participating in the Housing Voucher Program have enabled choice when they are
provided with sufficient information regarding their housing options so that any choice is informed.
For example, researchers found that, “if given the appropriate information and opportunities,
more voucher families would move to better schools when their children reach school age.”48
47 For additional information see HUD’s December 2016 study, “Discrimination Against Families with Children in Rental Housing Markets:
Findings of the Pilot Study” available at: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/HDSFamiliesFinalReport.pdf.
48 NYU Furman Center, “Why Don’t Housing Choice Voucher Recipients Live Near Better Schools? Insights from Big Data” published in
June 2016 available at: https://furmancenter.org/research/publication/why-don8217t-housing-voucher-recipients-live-near-better-schools-
insights-f.
24 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Analysis Requirements
An assessment of fair housing must consider the elements and factors that cause, increase, contribute
to, maintain, or perpetuate segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, signifi-
cant disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs.49 Such an assessment
would at least include all of the following components:50
●Identification and Analysis of Patterns and Trends: First, the assessment should identify the
conditions using either narration, data tables, maps or a combination of all three. See “Part
3: Resources” for sample data tables. The identification of conditions should spatially describe
concentrations of all the assessment of fair housing components (e.g., fair housing enforcement
and outreach, integration and segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty,
disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs including displacement
risk). Using the data tables and maps, the housing element must analyze differences in geog-
raphies. The analysis must address patterns at a regional and local level and trends in patterns
over time.51 Patterns at a regional level must compare conditions at the local level to the rest of
the region. This analysis should compare the locality at a county level or even broader regional
level such as a Council of Government, where appropriate, for the purposes of promoting more
inclusive communities. For localities near county borders, trends and patterns across county
boundaries should be addressed. Patterns at a local level must address whether certain areas
strongly differ from other areas and should utilize a data level (i.e., census tract or block group)
that is most meaningful for this analysis. At minimum, the analysis should compare patterns from
the most recent 5-Year American Community Survey and the prior 10-year census and could ad-
dress trends over longer periods of time. The analysis should also examine differences in housing
tenure (ownership vs. rental) among members of protected classes.
●Local Data and Knowledge: In addition to using federal or state level data sources, local
jurisdictions are also expected to use local data and knowledge to analyze local fair housing
issues, including information obtained through community participation or consultation, such
as narrative descriptions of people’s lived experiences. Federal and state level data identify fair
housing issues that exist within a community, but local data and knowledge can be especially
important to developing an understanding of why the problems exist and why they persist. Using
point-in-time federal and state level data sets alone to identify areas may misrepresent areas that
are experiencing more current and rapid changes or may be primed to do so in the near future.
Also, federal and state data sets might not be available or could be less accurate at a smaller
geography. For these reasons, an additional screen of local data and knowledge is necessary and
should complement available federal and state data sources. There may be rare circumstances in
which a jurisdiction has no local data or local knowledge for a particular topic and should include
a statement that it has no local data or local knowledge it can use to address that particular
assessment component.
49 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(10)(A), (c)(10)(B), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed.
Reg. 42271 (July 16, 2015). See also 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150, 5.152, 5.154(a), (d)(2) (2016).
50 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(10)(A), (c)(10)(B), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80
Fed. Reg. 42271, 42274, 42282-42283, 42322, 42323, 42336, 42339, 42353-42360, esp. 42355-42356 (July 16, 2015). See also 24 C.F.R. §§
5.150, 5.154(b)(2) (2016).
51 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(9), (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg.
42271; 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150, 5.514(d)(6), 5.158 (2016).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 25
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Other Relevant Factors: A discussion of other relevant factors is an important piece of eval-
uating patterns and trends, policies and practices, and other factors that lead to fair housing
conditions. Other relevant factors should consider information beyond data that identifies and
compares concentrations of groups with protected characteristics. Examples of other relevant
factors include changes and barriers in zoning and land use rules, information about past redlin-
ing/greenlining, patterns of institutionalization, restrictive covenants and other discriminatory
practices, presence and history of place-based investment, mobility option patterns, and out-
reach and community engagement. Demographic trends can include population growth, age,
housing tenure by protected characteristics, race, educational attainment, rates of homelessness,
construction, and rent and sales prices. Policies and practices should include governmental
barriers or lack of action, preservation of housing and development of new affordable housing,
and addressing the needs of renters and unhoused or unstably housed people. This discussion
should also incorporate the public participation process. Localities could engage the community
around these patterns and trends to better identify policies and practices that led, or could
lead, to less fair housing choice. This discussion should also include topics and information that
complement the data at a regional and local level and sub-geographies within a locality. Other
useful information could be the location and type of publicly assisted housing, such as housing
financed with federal, state, and local financing. Trends related to housing choice vouchers can
show patterns of concentration and integration to inform needed actions. Outcomes and policies
related to inclusionary ordinances, general plans or specific plans can also be a good source of
past practices to promote integration.
●Conclusions and Summary of Issues: A complete assessment must identify and summarize
key issues to better identify and prioritize contributing factors to fair housing issues. An analysis
will point to the clearest fair housing issue trends and patterns both within the jurisdiction and
in comparison to the region, and will highlight the primary practices and other factors that have
led to current conditions. In addition to utilizing the data and mapping resources, the jurisdiction
must draw upon relevant and easily obtainable local data and knowledge when describing fair
housing issues and trends. Local data may be more up-to-date and available at a more granular
level. The summary of issues must be detailed and comprehensive enough so that later in the
Assessment of Fair Housing it is clear what it would take for an action or program to not only
address, but overcome and undo, the identified fair housing issues.
Data Sources and Using the Statewide AFFH
Data Viewer
The assessment of fair housing should use a variety of data, such as the U.S. Census, American
Community Survey, local data and knowledge, and issues identified in the community participation
process. Local data and knowledge refer to any locally gathered and available information, such as a
survey with a reasonable statistical validity or usefulness for identifying contributing factors, policies,
and actions. Localities must also collaborate with regional agencies to collect the appropriate data for
the assessment of fair housing. For additional information on data sources see “Part 3: Resources.”
26 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Examples of Common Zoning and Land Use Barriers Include:
●Lack of zoning for a variety of housing types throughout a jurisdiction such as multifamily, duplex-
es to fourplexes, group housing, transitional and supportive housing at a variety of need levels,
shelters, single room occupancy, residential motels, mobilehomes, and accessory dwelling units
●Predominance of single family uses and larger lot sizes in racially concentrated areas of affluence
●Voter initiatives that restrict multifamily developments, rezoning to higher density, height limits or
similar measures that limit housing choices
●Multifamily height requirements
●Minimum unit sizes
●Parking requirements
●Lack of new affordable housing choices in high resource areas
●Lack of anti-displacement policies, including nonet loss of units in the case of demolitions and
replacement housing, and relocation ordinances
●Lack of incentives and other land use mechanisms to promote affordable housing throughout the
community
●Excluding group homes or residential care (greater than six persons) from single family zones or
excessive spacing/concentration requirements
●Family definitions or other occupancy requirements
●Nuisance or crime free ordinances or programs
●Ordinances prohibiting excessive use of city services
●Restrictive historic preservation districts
●Zoning that does not allow for residential uses in commercial zones
●Failure to allow supportive housing by right
●Failure to allow emergency shelters by right
●Lack of zoning on land appropriate for accessible development
Examples of Common Investment Barriers Include:
●Lack of infrastructure investment, including community infrastructure such as parks, community
amenities in lower resource areas, disadvantaged communities, and areas of concentrated poverty
●Lack of targeted housing preservation/conservation and tenant protection programs in areas at
risk of displacement
●Lack of public (local, state, or federal) funds invested in the development of affordable housing
●Absence of housing choice vouchers
●Limited housing stock affordable to lower income households or households with special needs
●Lack of proactive outreach with developers of affordable housing and non-profit service providers
●Lack of proactive measures to assist maintenance and rehabilitation of existing housing
●Lack of multilingual tenant counseling or foreclosure assistance
California Department of Housing and Community Development 27
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AFFH Data Viewer: In addition to various data sources, HCD has developed a statewide AFFH Data
Viewer. The AFFH Data Viewer assembles various data sources and provides options for addressing
each of the components within the full scope of the assessment of fair housing. The AFFH Data View-
er may be utilized to address the data components of new requirements to affirmatively furthering
fair housing but must be used in combination with other data such as local or regionally available
data. The AFFH Data Viewer consists of map data layers organized by: 1) Fair Housing Enforcement
and Outreach Capacity, 2) Segregation and Integration, 3) Disparities in Access to Opportunity, 4)
Disproportionate Housing Needs, including Displacement Risks, 5) Racially and Ethnically Concen-
trated Areas of Poverty and Affluence and 6) Supplemental Data. The AFFH Data Viewer is intended
to be useful to a broad audience, such as local and regional governments, and organizations involved
in the housing element process. For more information, visit the HCD’s website at www.hcd.ca.gov/
community-development/affh/.
Incorporate HUD Assessment of Fair Housing into Housing Elements
Generally, local jurisdictions that complete or revise an assessment of fair housing (AFH) or an analysis
of impediments to fair housing choice (AI) pursuant to past federal requirements (prior to August
17, 2015) may incorporate relevant portions into the AFH portion of their housing element. This may
include localities participating in a regional AI. For example, the housing element AFH may include
various data points from their HUD AFH or AI, such as fair housing issues, analysis of patterns and
trends, and identification of priorities that can be incorporated in concert with other data collection
and analysis required in the housing element. Identification and prioritization of contributing factors
to fair housing issues may also be useful as part of the housing element. However, incorporating
these documents, particularly the analysis of impediments, may not meet all requirements or might
include less relevant information than required for the housing element. For example, a regional
HUD AI might not have relevant local data or contributing factors tailored to fair housing issues.
Information in a HUD AFH or AI may also be outdated or incomplete depending on how recently
that information was prepared. Also, a HUD AI likely will not have the specific actions and programs
that will be required in the housing element. The housing element must have programs with specific
timelines, milestones, and metrics to ensure a meaningful impact. Local governments should seek
to incorporate only the relevant portions in a manner that complements the analysis, identification
of contributing factors and strategies and action. Jurisdictions may not simply add the HUD AFH or
AI as an appendix, or place sections into the housing element without context or purpose, in lieu of
engaging in the requisite analysis.52
Components of the Housing Element Assessment of Fair Housing53
An assessment of fair housing must identify and analyze patterns, trends, conditions, and practices
that result in less fair housing choice and must address all of the following assessment components.
This section addresses each of the required components:
1. Summary of fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity;
2. Integration and segregation patterns, and trends related to people with protected characteristics;
3. Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty;
52 Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(B).
53 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42353-42360 (esp. 42354-42356), 42361-42362 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150, 5.152, 5.154(a), (b)(2), (d) (2016).
28 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
4. Disparities in access to opportunity for people with protected characteristics, including persons
with disabilities; and
5. Disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including displacement risk.
1. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity relates to the ability of a locality and fair housing
entities to disseminate information related to fair housing and provide outreach and education to
assure community members are well aware of fair housing laws and rights. In addition, enforcement
and outreach capacity includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as
investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing. The summary
should include (1) a listing of local, regional and state agencies and organizations active in the locality,
(2) description of primary activities and capacity for each entity, including actions taken by the local-
ity, such as provision of dedicated resources, (3) evaluation of impacts on protected characteristics
and geographic trends, and (4) any additional relevant information about fair housing enforcement,
outreach capacity, and resources in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected
characteristics.54
This summary will provide valuable information for local jurisdictions to evaluate fair housing issues
that exist within the community, highlighting needs for remediation of existing fair housing concerns.
Wherever possible, the summary should include a discussion of fair housing enforcement and out-
reach at a geographic level appropriate to better determine any locational trends—simply reporting
information at a city-wide level will not fully display patterns and impacts on protected characteris-
tics. Examples of appropriate geographic levels include census tracts, block groups, neighborhoods,
housing development, or any other sub-section of a locality. Additionally, fair housing organizations
and other non-profits that receive funding through the Fair Housing Initiatives Program are a valuable
resource for information, trends, and patterns to tailor and complete an adequate summary of fair
housing enforcement and outreach capacity. An adequate discussion of fair housing enforcement
and outreach will provide the necessary background information that can be analyzed with other
components of the assessment of fair housing and site inventory to better inform contributing fac-
tors, priorities, and meaningful actions.
This summary must address: 55
●Findings, lawsuits, enforcement actions, settlements, or judgments related to fair housing or civil
rights;
●Compliance with existing fair housing laws and regulations;
●Fair housing enforcement and housing outreach capacity; and
●Conclusion and findings: Summary of fair housing issues related to enforcement and outreach
capacity and relationship to other fair housing issue areas (e.g., segregation and integration,
racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, etc.).
54 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42353-42360 (esp. 42354-42356), 42361-42362 (July 16, 2015).
55 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42353-
42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 CFR § 5.154 (2016).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 29
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Findings, Lawsuits, Enforcement Actions, Settlements or Judgments
Related to Fair Housing and Civil Rights
This section lists and summarizes legal actions that have or have not been resolved, including a
charge or letter of finding from HUD concerning a violation of a civil rights-related law, a cause deter-
mination from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) or local fair housing agency
concerning a violation of a state or local fair housing law, a letter of findings or notice of violation
issued by HCD, or a letter of findings issued by or lawsuit filed or joined by the U.S. Department of
Justice or the State of California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, alleging a
pattern or practice or systemic violation of a state and/or federal fair housing or civil rights law, or a
claim under the False Claims Act related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, or civil rights generally,
including an alleged failure to affirmatively further fair housing.
Compliance with Existing Fair Housing Laws and Regulations
The element should include a description of state and local fair housing laws and how the locality
complies with those laws.
Examples of state fair housing laws include:
●California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900)
of Division 3 of Title 2)
●FEHA Regulations (California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 2, sections 12005-12271)
●Government Code section 65008 covers actions of a city, county, city and county, or other local
government agency, and makes those actions null and void if the action denies an individual or
group of individuals the enjoyment of residence, landownership, tenancy, or other land use in the
state because of membership in a protected class, the method of financing, and/or the intended
occupancy.
»For example, a violation under Government Code section 65008 may occur if a jurisdiction
applied more scrutiny to reviewing and approving an affordable development as compared to
market-rate developments, or multifamily housing as compared to single family homes.
»Government Code section 65008, subdivision (e), authorizes preferential treatment of afford-
able housing
●Government Code section 8899.50 requires all public agencies to administer programs and
activities relating to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further
fair housing and avoid any action that is materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively
further fair housing.
●Government Code section 11135 et seq. requires full and equal access to all programs and ac-
tivities operated, administered, or funded with financial assistance from the state, regardless of
one’s membership or perceived membership in a protected class.
●Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code, § 65915.)
●Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code, § 65589.5.)
●No-Net-Loss Law (Gov. Code, § 65863)
30 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Least Cost Zoning Law (Gov. Code, § 65913.1)
●Excessive subdivision standards (Gov. Code, § 65913.2.)
●Limits on growth controls (Gov. Code, § 65302.8.)
●Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65583, esp. subds. (c)(5), (c)(10).)
Examples of local fair housing laws include:
●San Francisco’s “No Eviction without Representation Act” which provides eligible tenants who
have received an eviction notice, or been served with an unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit, free
legal representation.
●Local rent control or rent freezes
●Voter initiatives to fund affordable and/or supportive housing
●Local ordinances that limit rent increases and limit late fees
●Ordinances facilitating community land trusts and tenant opportunities to purchase their multi-
family housing
●Local ordinances designed to prevent displacement of mobilehome residents
●Local relocation ordinances
●Local ordinances that prohibit unlawful harassment of tenants including things such as illegal
lockouts, utility shutoffs, and removing tenants’ belongings from the unit.
●The City of Oakland’s tenant protection ordinance which makes it illegal for landlords to misrep-
resent or conceal material facts related to a tenant vacating
●Inclusionary ordinances
●Laws/regulations or agreements related to the use of local housing funds
●Eviction protection ordinances enacted to protect renters during the COVID-19 pandemic and
rental relief programs to protect tenancies that accumulated rental debt during the pandemic
2. Integration and Segregation Patterns and
Trends Related to People with Protected Characteristics and
Lower Incomes
To inform priorities, policies, and actions, the housing element must include an analysis of integration
and segregation, including patterns and trends, related to people with protected characteristics.56
Importantly, the analysis must address both integration and segregation to holistically evaluate the
patterns and practices and better identify and prioritize contributing factors to fair housing issues.57 A
strong analysis would also address segregation and integration of households with lower incomes.58
56 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. § 5.152 (2016).
57 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154 (2016).
58 Gov. Code, §§ 65008, 65583 [“shall make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs for all economic segments of the
community] and subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154 (2016).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 31
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Defining Integration and Segregation
Integration generally means a condition in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a
particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular
type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area.
Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a
particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a type of
disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a broader geographic area.
The analysis must address areas of ongoing and concentrated segregation and integration and com-
pare concentrations of protected characteristics and incomes at both a regional and local level.59
The analysis should consist of comparisons using data tables or maps. To compare, the analysis
should discuss the degrees of segregation and integration for protected characteristics and incomes.
At minimum, the analysis must discuss levels of segregation and integration for race and ethnicity,
income, familial status, persons with disabilities, and identify the groups that experience the highest
levels of segregation. 60
Data Considerations
Two quantitative metrics can be used to analyze the relative extent of racial and ethnic segregation
in entitlement jurisdictions for federal housing programs.61 These are known as the dissimilarity index
and the isolation index. The dissimilarity index is a primary quantitative metric used for identifying
patterns of geographic segregation. The isolation index, another quantitative metric for identifying
patterns of geographic segregation, compares a group’s share of the overall population to the average
share within a given sub-area (such as block group). Data to calculate dissimilarity index and isolation
index are available at the Census Tract or block group level from the American Community Survey:
https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/data.html. Smaller jurisdictions may wish to utilize
block group level data to better capture trends and patterns. Additional sources and approaches
include the Entropy Index, the Divergency Index and the Exposure Index. For more information on
formulas, see “Part 3: Resources.”
Identifying Dissimilarity at a Regional Level: To determine dissimilarity at a regional level, data ta-
bles or maps should be utilized to compare the locality to the broader region. See “Part 3: Resources”
for sample data tables.
Identifying Dissimilarity at a Local Level: To determine dissimilarity or isolation at a local level,
the housing element should identify and compare indices across census tracts, block group or some
59 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154 (2016).
60 Gov. Code, § 8899.50; 24 C.F.R. 51.154(d) (2016); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42284-42285
(July 16, 2015).
61 HUD. (2013). AFFH Data Documentation. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pdf/FR-5173-P-01_AFFH_data_
documentation.pdf; Glaeser, E. and Vigdor, J. (2001). Racial Segregation in the 2000 Census: Promising News. Washington, DC: The
Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/
glaeser.pdf
32 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
other geography at a level that best highlights patterns of segregation and integration. Data tables
or maps may be utilized.
Identifying Dissimilarity for Lower Income Households: Using readily available data, local juris-
dictions should map concentrations of low- and moderate-income (LMI) households within the com-
munity. Particularly for smaller jurisdictions with relatively few Census Tracts, this tool can enhance
understanding of where there are pockets of concentrated low and moderate-income households
within the community, because data are available at the block group level.
Data for this analysis are available in the form of HUD Low and Moderate Income Summary Data
(LMISD), based on the American Community Survey (2011-2015). The data are available at the block
group level from the following website: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/acs-low-mod-sum-
mary-data/acs-low-mod-summary-data-block-groups-places/ The data file includes records for each
block group with a calculation of the percentage of households that are LMI.
The LMISD data for the local jurisdiction can be thematically mapped to show the block groups
where there are high concentrations of LMI households. Local jurisdictions should use this tool as part
of the needs assessment to understand where there are concentrations of lower-income households
within the community and identify the need for housing element policies and programs that can help
to better distribute households of all income levels across the community. This can also highlight the
need for housing element policies and programs that can help to provide better access to opportuni-
ty for households that live in areas where there are high concentrations of lower-income households.
This map can be overlaid with R/ECAP maps to identify areas where there are concentrations of
LMI households as well as higher levels of segregation. Because the block group data available for
this tool enables a more fine-grained geographic analysis of patterns low-income concentration and
racial/ethnic segregation, this approach may be particularly useful in jurisdictions with relatively low
populations spread across small numbers of census tracts where tools that rely on data only available
at the census tract level may not provide sufficient resolution for meaningful analysis (e.g., see R/
ECAP tool, below).
3. Racially & Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP)
The housing element must include an analysis of racially and ethnically concentrated areas of pov-
erty.62 A strong analysis will separately evaluate significant concentrations of poverty and concentra-
tions of Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) populations. The analysis must be conducted
at a regional and a local level where the incidence of concentrated areas of poverty is discussed
relative to the region and within the locality. 63 Importantly, this regional comparison should discuss
the incidence of racial concentrations in areas of affluence. For example, a jurisdiction might not have
areas of concentrated poverty, but have areas of affluence or vice versa, which might be unique when
compared to the rest of the region. Identifying this difference between the locality and the region
62 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154(c) (2016).
63 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42771, 42273, 42275, 42338-42342 (July 16, 2015); 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.152, 5.154(d), 5.156(d) (2016).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 33
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
is an essential part of evaluating policies, practices and investments to better identify and prioritize
contributing factors to fair housing issues. The analysis should evaluate the patterns and changes
over time and consider other relevant factors, such as public participation, past policies, practices,
and investments and demographic trends.
Data Considerations
R/ECAP: To assist communities in identifying racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty
(also known as R/ECAPs), HUD developed a definition that relies on a racial and ethnic concentration
threshold, as well as a poverty test. For an area to be identified as having a racial and ethnic concen-
tration, the threshold is that a RCAP or ECAP have a non-White population of 50 percent or more,
within metropolitan or micropolitan areas. In locations outside these areas, where the non-White
populations are likely to be much smaller than 50 percent, the threshold is set at 20 percent. The
poverty test defines areas of “extreme poverty” as those where 40 percent or more of the population
lives at or below the federal poverty line, or those where the poverty rate is three times the average
poverty rate in the metropolitan area, whichever is less. An area that meets either the racial or ethnic
concentration and also meets the poverty test would be considered a RCAP or ECAP; broadly re-
ferred to as R/ECAPs.
The R/ECAP database is available online at:
https://hudgis-hud.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/56de4edea8264fe5a344da9811ef5d6e_0.
TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map: The High Segregation & Poverty category in the TCAC/HCD Oppor-
tunity Area Map may also be used in identifying R/ECAPS and is available online at:
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp
Much like the R/ECAP, the High Segregation and Poverty category uses an absolute threshold for
poverty. However, instead of a threshold for race, the TCAC/HCD approach uses a location quotient
for racial segregation. The poverty threshold is 30 percent of the population living below the poverty
line and the location quotient is essentially a measure of the concentration of race in a small area
compared to a county level.
Local jurisdictions can use the HUD data to map or the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Map for High
Segregation and Poverty to identify and analyze the presence of R/ECAPS in their community.
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: In addition to identifying and analyzing racially and
ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, an analysis should also consider concentrated areas of afflu-
ence to better evaluate trends, patterns, policies, and practices and to guide meaningful goals and
actions to address fair housing issues. In response to the R/ECAPs utilized by HUD in its 2015 AFFH
rule, scholars at the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs have created the Ra-
cially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) metric to more fully tell the story of segregation in the
United States.64 Based on their research, RCAAs are defined as census tracts where 1) 80 percent or
more of the population is white, and 2) the median household income is $125,000 or greater (slightly
more than double the national the median household income in 2016). While this is a useful measure
nationwide, HCD has adjusted the RCAA methodology to better reflect California’s relative diversity.
64 Goetz, E. G., Damiano, A., & Williams, R. A. (2019). Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: A Preliminary Investigation. Cityscape: A
Journal of Policy Development and Research, 21(1), 99–124.
34 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
HCD’s version of the RCAA map and accompanying data can be accessed using the AFFH Data
Viewer, and HCD encourages jurisdictions to use this metric as they prepare their R/ECAP analysis.
When analyzing patterns and trends of segregation and proposing policy approaches, localities
should not only focus on communities of color. Segregation is a continuum, with polarity between
race, poverty, and affluence, which can be a direct product of the same policies and practices. To
better evaluate these conditions, both sides of the continuum should be considered and compare
patterns within the community and across the region. This more holistic approach will better unveil
deeply rooted policies and practices and improve identification and prioritization of contributing
factors to inform more meaningful actions.
Local jurisdictions should use this information to understand where there are racial/ethnic concentra-
tions of poverty and affluence as a starting point. A complete analysis will then address the trends,
patterns, policies, practices, and conditions in combination with other relevant factors to summarize
issues and better inform goals and actions.
4. Disparities in Access to Opportunity65
The housing element must identify and analyze significant disparities in access to opportunity. While
the analysis can consider indices of various access to opportunity variables, it must also independent-
ly address access to opportunity variables. For example, the analysis may evaluate total access to
opportunity (e.g., high, moderate, low), but must also individually address access to opportunity
for education, transportation, economic development, and environment. This more complete un-
derstanding of what types of disparities in access to opportunity exist for what populations and in
what geographies is necessary to identify and prioritize contributing factors to fair housing issues
and formulation of goals and actions. This analysis must be conducted at a regional and local level
and should address substantial differences in access to education, transportation, economic, en-
vironment and other important opportunities based on socio-economic characteristics (e.g., race,
income, familial status, disability, income, poverty). Patterns over time should be discussed as well
as policies, practices, and investments that affect access to opportunity. Local data and knowledge
and other relevant factors must be considered, including incorporating public outreach and targeted
community engagement. This analysis is a key opportunity to engage residents to learn what they
want/need, but lack access to, as well as essential community assets to preserve.
What is Access to Opportunity?
Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate place-based characteristics linked to crit-
ical life outcomes. Access to opportunity oftentimes means both improving the quality of life
for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility and access to ‘high
resource’ neighborhoods. This encompasses education, employment, economic development,
safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, and other opportunities,
including recreation, food and healthy environment (air, water, safe neighborhood, safety from
environmental hazards, social services, and cultural institutions).
65 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (c)(10), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271,
42305, 42338, 42336, 42353-42360 (July 16, 2015).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 35
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Housing Element Access to Opportunity Analysis
Through maps, data tables and discussion, the access to opportunity analysis must address the fol-
lowing opportunity variables: education, transportation, economic, environment, and other factors.
For educational opportunities, the analysis should, at minimum:
●Describe any differences amongst schools within a jurisdiction and whether access to more pro-
ficient schools has any patterns across protected characteristics (e.g., race and ethnicity, familial
status, persons with disabilities);
●Analyze the proximity of proficient and less proficient schools to areas of segregation and racial
and ethnic concentrated areas of poverty; and
●Evaluate the presence or lack of policies, practices, and investment to promote access to more
proficient schools or that contribute to a disparity in access to opportunity.
For employment opportunities, the analysis should, at minimum:
●Describe any disparities in access to jobs by protected groups;
●Address where protected groups live and how that affects their ability to obtain a job; and
●Evaluate employment trends by protected groups.
For transportation opportunities, the analysis should, at minimum:
●Compare concentrations of protected groups with access to transportation options;
●Assess any disproportionate transportation needs for members of protected classes; and
●Analyze combined housing and transportation cost impacts on protected groups.
For access to a healthy environment, the analysis should, at a minimum:
●Describe any disparities in access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods by protected class
groups;
●Consider available statewide data such as CalEnviroScreen at
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-30;
●Evaluate consistency with the environmental justice element; and
●Discuss policies, practices and investments that impact access to environmentally healthy neigh-
borhoods.
Additional factors to consider in the analysis should, at minimum:
●Patterns in Disparities in Access to Opportunity
»Identify and discuss any overarching patterns of access to opportunity for members of protect-
ed classes, including trends over time;
»Identify areas that experience an aggregate of poor access to opportunity; and
»Include how these patterns compare to patterns of segregation and R/ECAPs.
36 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Additional Information
»Provide additional relevant information, including local data and knowledge and community
input, about disparities in access to opportunity in the locality and relative to the region.
Data Considerations
In collaboration, the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and HCD developed the
TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, a mapping tool that identifies areas of higher and lower resources to
evaluate access to opportunity. The tool maps areas of highest resource, high resource, moderate
resource, moderate resource (rapidly changing), low resource and high segregation and poverty.
Note: The moderate resource (rapidly changing) designation is still being evaluated to understand
its efficacy at predicting future trends. The tool may be utilized to identify areas of high and low
resources to address this analysis and is available at:
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp
The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps can help to identify areas within the community that provide
good access to opportunity for residents or, conversely, provide low access to opportunity. They
can also help to highlight areas that are rapidly changing (potentially creating risk of displacement
for lower-income households) and areas where there are high levels of segregation and poverty.
The information from the opportunity mapping can help to highlight the need for housing element
policies and programs that would help to remediate conditions in low resource areas and areas of
high segregation and poverty and to encourage better access for LMI and BIPOC households to
housing in high resource areas.
Disparities in Access to Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities
An analysis of disparities in access to opportunity must specifically address the housing and com-
munity development needs of persons with disabilities. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, over
four million Californians have a disability. Health and safety are directly linked to housing, and yet,
many people with disabilities face enormous barriers in finding suitable housing to accommodate
their needs. Additionally, because people with disabilities have faced a history of institutionaliza-
tion–in state hospitals, developmental centers, jails and prisons, etc. – ensuring that appropriate
community-based housing with appropriate supports exists is critical. People with disabilities are
also overrepresented in the unhoused population and any solutions related to homelessness must
address appropriate accommodations and accessibility. Critically, there are significant disparities by
race within the population with disabilities, so jurisdictions should engage in an intersectional analysis
of needs. The assessment should consider the unique needs and barriers faced by persons with
disabilities and whether persons with disabilities are able to access housing choices and services in
an integrated community-based setting. Examples include accessibility features for housing, trans-
portation, education, jobs and other types of community elements to enable fair housing choices.
Disability types include hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory
difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty.
Data and factors to consider in an analysis of access to opportunity for persons with disabilities could
include:
California Department of Housing and Community Development 37
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Prevalence of Disability by Type (e.g., vision, hearing, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care and inde-
pendent living)
●Disability by Age Group
●Disability by Race/Ethnicity/National Origin
●Assessment of Supportive Housing Stock and Other Housing Stock Including Group Homes,
Homes for People with Intellectual or Developmental Disabilities and Mental Health Disabilities
●Assessment of Accessibility of Homelessness Programs and Coordinated Entry System
●General or Estimated Number of “Covered Multifamily Dwellings” – Adaptable Units under the
Fair Housing Act66
»Federal law triggers specific accessibility requirements in fourplex and larger developments
with covered multifamily dwellings.
●Estimated Number of Units with Mobility and Communication Accessibility Features under Cali-
fornia Building Code Ch. 11B for public housing projects67 – housing provided by, for, or on behalf
of a public entity, or as part of a public entity’s program to provide housing
»5 percent of these units are required to have mobility features, 2 percent of the units are
required to have communication features regardless of first occupancy date or number of units
in a building, including multistory dwellings and single-family dwellings. Note: Jurisdictions
should consider higher requirements commensurate with identified need.
●Estimated Number of Multifamily Units pursuant to Government Code section 12955.1(b)
»10 percent of units in multifamily buildings without elevators consisting of three or more rental
units or four or more condominium units are subject to accessibility building standards.
To address the housing needs of persons with disabilities and better inform the formulation of pol-
icies and actions, the analysis should include, where available: (1) data tables to evaluate trends,
magnitude of needs relative to disability at a local, regional and state level (see Resources section for
sample tables), (2) maps to analyze spatial patterns relative to accessibility features and services, in
comparison to racial and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, (3) housing accessibility, such as
the dispersion of housing choices and zoning to encourage a variety of housing types, (4) efforts to
integrate persons with disabilities into community based settings, and (5) a discussion of dispropor-
tionate housing needs, including policies and practices such as zoning barriers and gaps, disparities
in access to accessibility features, services, resources and strategies, including geographically. Exam-
ples of data sources include U.S Census and American Community Survey. When evaluating spatial
patterns, an analysis should address whether persons with disabilities are concentrated or integrated
throughout the jurisdiction and region and if there are any geographic patterns for persons with
disabilities by age.
66 The Fair Housing Act requires all "covered multifamily dwellings" designed and constructed for first occupancy after March 13, 1991 to
be accessible to and usable by people with disabilities. Covered multifamily dwellings are all dwelling units in buildings containing four or
more units with one or more elevators, and all ground floor units in buildings containing four or more units, without an elevator. Federal
regulations adopted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development at 24 C.F.R. § 100.201 define covered multi-family dwellings.
67 California Building Code Chapter 11B covers public housing and generally meets 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act Standards, Fair
Housing Act requirements when applicable by requiring adaptability features of FHA to other covered multifamily dwelling units if built for
first occupancy as housing on or after March 13, 1991.
38 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
This disparities analysis for people with disabilities may be included in the disparities in access to op-
portunity section, segregation and integration section, as part of the section of the housing element
that addresses the housing needs of persons with special needs, or in the specific analysis required
on potential constraints on housing for persons with disabilities. Additionally, the analysis must go
beyond simply identifying and removing barriers and constraints. The analysis should discuss re-
sources and strategies to encourage housing options and access to opportunity to better inform
meaningful and proactive goals and actions to address the housing and community development
needs of persons with disabilities.
Common Zoning Barriers for Persons with Disabilities
●Reasonable Accommodation Procedure: The lack of a procedure to address disability issues is
one of the most prominent zoning barriers because a strong process can be utilized to provide
exception to zoning and land use policies that impact housing choices and livability for persons
with disabilities. Other common issues with reasonable accommodation procedures include
excessive findings of approval, burden on applicants to prove the need for exception, application
costs, and discretionary approvals.
●Family Definition: Family definitions in zoning or other land use related documents can directly
impact housing choices for persons with disabilities, particularly group home situations. Examples
of common elements in family definitions that have an exclusionary effect include regulating the
number of people, or requiring occupants to be related or under one lease agreement.
●Excluding Group Homes: Excluding group homes, community or residential care homes for
seven or more persons, or subjecting these homes to a conditional use permit in single family
zones acts as a barrier to housing choice for persons with disabilities.
●Spacing Requirements: Excessive spacing requirements, such 500 feet or more, between group
homes or community or residential care facilities can have a direct impact on the supply of hous-
ing choices.
●Unit Types and Sizes: The lack of multifamily housing or zoned capacity for multifamily and a
variety of sizes from efficiency to four or more bedrooms can constrain the ability of persons with
disabilities to live in a more integrated community setting.
●Lack of Accessible Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): ADUs can provide an important housing
choice for persons with disabilities or care providers, including independent and integrated living
patterns.
●Nuisance and Crime Free Ordinances: Ordinances that can be used or have the effect of dis-
proportionately targeting persons with disabilities.
●Lack of By Right Zoning for Supportive Housing: By right zoning for supportive housing can
result in more objective processes that are less likely to discriminate or have the effect of discrim-
inating against persons with disabilities.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 39
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
5. Disproportionate Housing Needs, Including Displacement
The housing element must include an assessment of disproportionate housing needs, including
displacement risk, on people with protected characteristics and households with low incomes. This
analysis is important to understand how some groups of persons experience severe housing needs
when compared to other populations within a local level and when compared to a region. Particularly
important to this analysis is local data and knowledge, since some areas could be impacted by market
conditions that put households at risk of displacement, or pending or upcoming planning decisions
may exacerbate displacement risk.
Disproportionate Housing Needs generally refers to a condition in which there are signifi-
cant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of
housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or
the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic
area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing need are based on such factors as
cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, homelessness, and substandard housing
conditions.
At minimum, the analysis must address:
●Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden: Cost burden is the fraction of a household’s total gross
income spent on housing costs. There are two levels of cost burden: (1) “Cost Burden” refers
to the number of households for which housing cost burden is greater than 30 percent of their
income; and (2) “Severe Cost Burden” refers to the number of households paying 50 percent or
more of their income for housing. This analysis must address the burdens on both owners and
renters (tenure).
●Overcrowding: Households having more than 1.01 to 1.5 persons per room are considered over-
crowded and those having more than 1.51 persons per room are considered severely overcrowd-
ed. The person per room analysis excludes bathrooms, porches, foyers, halls, or half-rooms. This
analysis must address the overcrowding on both owners and renters.
●Substandard Housing: As defined by the U.S. Census, there are two types of substandard
housing problems: (1) Households without hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet and a bathtub
or shower; and (2) Households with kitchen facilities that lack a sink with piped water, a range or
stove, or a refrigerator. Given the limits of this measure, the analysis must incorporate local data
and knowledge, such as housing conditions surveys or code enforcement activities.
●Homelessness: Includes individuals or families who lack or are perceived to lack a fixed, regular,
and adequate nighttime residence, or who have a primary nighttime residence in a shelter, on
the street, in a vehicle, or in an enclosure or structure that is not authorized or fit for human
habitation. People experiencing homelessness are vulnerable to violence and criminalization due
to their unhoused status.
40 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
The analysis should address these factors for protected characteristics and at least race and ethnicity,
familial status, persons with disabilities and incomes. The analysis may use data tables or maps and
at least must compare the locality to the broader region and the sub-geographies within the locality.
Other considerations for the analysis include:
●Identifying the protected groups (e.g., race/ethnicity, familial status, persons with disabilities and
income) that experience higher rates of housing cost burden, overcrowding, homelessness, or
substandard housing when compared to other groups);
●Discussing the areas of a locality that experience the greatest disproportionate housing needs
and any coincidence with protected groups;
●Comparing the needs of families with the availability of housing stock with two and three or more
bedrooms; and,
●Evaluating significant disparities relative to other factors such as renter and owner rates.
Displacement
Shifts in neighborhood composition are often framed and perpetuated by established patterns of
racial inequity and segregation. Neighborhood change is influenced by three processes: movement
of people, public policies and investments, such as capital improvements and planned transit stops,
and flows of private capital (Zuk et al 2015)68. These processes can disproportionally impact people
of color, as well as lower income households, persons with disabilities, large households, and persons
at-risk or experiencing homelessness. These processes can also displace people to the extent of
homelessness. An assessment of displacement within a city should address these three processes
and their mutual dependencies, particularly as mediated by race and scale. For the purposes of this
guidance, displacement is used to describe any involuntary household move caused by landlord
action or market changes. Displacement is fueled by a combination of rising housing costs, rising
income inequality, stagnant wages, and insufficient market-rate housing production (Been, Ellen,
& O’Regan 2018)69. Decades of disinvestment in low-income communities, coupled with investor
speculation, can result in a rent gap or a disparity between current rental income of the land, and
potentially achievable rental income if the property is converted to its most profitable use.
Displacement can broadly be understood to be caused by disinvestment, investment-fueled gen-
trification, or a process combining the two. Low-income neighborhoods experience displacement
due to disinvestment resulting from both public and private sector decisions. Similarly, both public
and private investments fuel displacement by attracting residents with higher incomes and higher
educational attainments into low-income communities (Chapple 2020).70 These forces can cause
both physical displacement, preventing low-income communities of color from benefiting from the
new economic growth; cultural displacement, as cultural resources disappear and communities are
disrupted; and/or exclusionary displacement, with increasing housing prices preventing the entrance
of low-income households (Cash et al. 2020).71
68 Zuk, M., et al. (2015). Gentrification, Displacement, and the Role of Public Investment. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, 32.
69 Been, V., Ingrid, E., & O’Regan, K. (2019). Supply Skepticism: Housing Supply and Affordability. Housing Policy Debate, 29(1), 25-40.
70 Chapple, K. (2020). “On the Brink of Homelessness: How the Affordable Housing Crisis and the Gentrification of America Is Leaving Families
Vulnerable.” Written statement for the record before the House Financial Services Committee, Washington DC: January 14, 2020. https://
docs.house.gov/meetings/BA/BA00/20200114/110362/HHRG-116-BA00-Wstate-ChappleK-20200114.pdfDesmon
71 Cash, Anna et al. (2019). Building a National Narrative of Anti-Displacement Strategies: Key Takeaways From SPARCCC Regions. Urban
Displacement Project, University of California, Berkeley.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 41
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Disinvestment-driven Displacement: Historically, low-income communities in California with large
populations of people of color have received fewer public sector investments in infrastructure,
impacting everything from parks and schools to streets and sewers. Racially exclusionary housing
policies and limited access to credit have limited and shaped private-sector investments in the same
communities with lasting impact on homeownership and intergenerational wealth building (Troun-
stine 2018).72 Together, these forms of neighborhood disinvestment can lead to displacement of low-
and moderate-income communities and communities of color. Disinvestment-fueled displacement
can occur when the value of a property does not justify investing in its maintenance, often resulting
in abandonment and decay (Zuk et al 2015).73 These displaced residents can often endure “hyper-
mobility” when forced moves to substandard housing compel them to rapidly move again, creating
a destructive cycle of housing instability (Desmond et al. 2015).74
Investment-driven Displacement: Displacement can take place as a neighborhood undergoes a
process of gentrification, particularly within the context of the increasing desirability of housing in
urban cores. Often following decades of disinvestment, a flood of public and private sector invest-
ments can lead to real estate speculation, improvements in transit access, and changes in land use.
While these investments and changes can be positive, they are also associated with displacement, as
historic residents cannot afford to stay and benefit from investments in housing, transit infrastructure,
and access to healthy foods. Studies of gentrification and investment-driven displacement consis-
tently describe a pattern of whiter, wealthier, and more educated residents moving into historically
disinvested neighborhoods, matching an outflow of poorer renters of color displaced by rising resi-
dential rents (Zuk et al. 2015).75
The foreclosure crisis contributed to making low-income communities vulnerable to gentrification and
displacement. In these communities, disproportionate levels of predatory subprime lending resulted
in waves of foreclosures, leaving the neighborhoods vulnerable to investors looking to purchase and
flip homes. This displacement has been financed by banks, private equity, and Wall Street firms.
Capital providers often work with real estate speculators and serial evictor corporate landlords who
purchase properties with the intention of evicting tenants and small businesses.
Gentrification: A process of neighborhood change that includes economic change in a histor-
ically disinvested neighborhood —by means of real estate investment and new higher-income
residents moving in - as well as demographic change - not only in terms of income level, but
also in terms of changes in the education level or racial make-up of residents.76
72 Jessica Trounstine, Segregation By Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities. (Cambridge University Press, 2018).
73 Zuk, M., et al. (2015). Gentrification, Displacement, and the Role of Public Investment. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, 32.
74 Desmond, M., Gershenson, C., & Kiviat, B. (2015). Forced Relocation and Residential Instability among Urban Renters. Social Science Review
89(2). 237-262.
75 Zuk, M., et al. (2015). Gentrification, Displacement, and the Role of Public Investment. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, 32.
76 Gentrification Explained | Urban Displacement Project
42 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Disaster-driven Displacement: The geologic and climate forces that have helped shape California’s
natural beauty also make the state susceptible to environmental disasters and their ensuing potential
for displacement. California’s recent history has shown that environmental disasters such as wild-
fires, earthquakes and floods can be significant causes of displacement, and that climate change is
accelerating the risk from such disaster events. The risk of climate disaster can also put pressure on
lower income communities as wealthy people seek to relocate to safer locations. An analysis should
address the potential displacement from local environmental hazards. Jurisdictions should make
reference to their Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, Safety Element, Environmental Justice Element, and
any recent locally available hazard data in detailing the types of environmental hazards present in the
community, the location of high hazard risk areas in the community, and what type of populations live
in those areas of heightened hazard risk. FEMA flood maps are a good starting point for assessing
flood risk, but jurisdictions are encouraged to utilize any more recent local flood risk data available,
as FEMA flood maps can oftentimes be outdated and fail to account for climate change.77 Addressing
disaster risk is not a justification for furthering segregation, and policies that seek to address this risk
should include strategies that mitigate the risk of displacement and exclusion.
In this analysis, jurisdictions should make note of potential impacts of disasters on protected class-
es and low-income residents, particularly low-income renter populations. Research has shown that
low-income renter populations are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards and that
housing tenure is a telling determinant of social vulnerability to disasters.78 Renters bear the brunt of
the existing affordable housing shortage, and their adaptive capacity to cope and recover from the
impacts of environmental hazards may be reduced due to systemic inequities and limited resources.
Furthermore, renters also face the added physical challenges because they do not control the housing
units they live in, and are more likely to be displaced post-disaster because of the following forces:
●Lack of control of when or if their housing unit will be rebuilt
●Lack of control of the maintenance or possible addition of resilience investments to the property
●Fewer financial resources to rebuild rental housing than for homeowners
●Rental price increases as rental housing supply decreases
●Evictions
●More likely to live in housing typologies such as apartments or duplexes, which can take longer
to rebuild post-disaster
Any analysis of disaster-driven displacement risk should call out how those risks impact low-in-
come renters in the community, and any programs or resources in place meant to increase
resiliency and address those hazard risks. Disaster risk is not a justification for the perpetuation
of patterns of segregation. Jurisdictions should creatively utilize both land use planning and
public investments in mitigation measures to solve for the issues of environmental hazard risk,
climate change adaptation, fair housing, and housing affordability simultaneously.
77 Homeland Security Inspector General – FEMA Needs to Improve Management of its Flood Mapping Programs, 2017, https://www.
documentcloud.org/documents/4066233-OIG-17-110-Sep17.html
78 Lee & Van Zandt, 2018, Social Vulnerability to Disasters: A Review of the Evidence
California Department of Housing and Community Development 43
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Data Considerations: Through maps, data tables, and discussion, the analysis must address the
concentrations of risk of displacement. The analysis might consider the following variables that are
associated with risk of displacement and neighborhood change.
Other Considerations:
●Public Infrastructure Investments: Government investments in physical infrastructure, such as
rail transit, schools, parks, and highways can be associated with increasing home values and
subsequent displacing forces (Zuk et al. 2015).
●Historically Disinvested Areas: Today’s displacement is built upon a history of dispossession
and exclusion, fueled by racism, and perpetuated by the logic of capitalism. Historical exclu-
sionary housing policies such as redlining, racially restrictive covenants, implicitly racial zoning,
racialized public housing policies, and urban renewal continue to shape wealth accumulation and
access to resources like high-quality schools and job centers.
●At-risk Affordable Units: The conversion of federally-and -state-subsidized affordable rental
developments to market-rate units can constitute a substantial loss of housing opportunity for
low-income residents. There are approximately 149,000 units of privately owned, federally as-
sisted, multifamily rental housing, as well as tax-credit and mortgage revenue bond properties,
often with project-based rental assistance. As the subsidy contracts or regulatory agreements
expire, a large percentage of these units may convert to market-rate. These at-risk units are home
to seniors and families with low incomes who are at risk of displacement if the developments
convert.
44 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Income Variables
Variable Data Source Association
Income Diversity U.S. Census Table P007
ACS % Year Estimates Table B03002
Higher income diversity is associated with
higher risk of neighborhood change
% of renters paying >35%
of income ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04 Higher share of rent-burdened tenants is
associated with higher risk of displacement
% of owners paying >35%
of income ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04 Higher share of over-burdened owners
associated with less risk of displacement
Demographic Variables
Variable Data Source Association
% non-family households ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP02, B09029 Larger share of non-family households associ-
ated with higher risk of displacement
% non-Hispanic whites ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP05 Larger share of non-Hispanic whites associated
with lower risk of displacement
Educational Attainment ACS 5 Year Estimates, S21501 Increasing share of high educational attain-
ment associated with active displacement
Housing Variables
Variable Data Source Association
% of dwellings units in
buildings with 3+ units ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04 Higher share of multi-unit buildings is associat-
ed with higher risk of displacement
% renter-occupied housing ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04 Higher share of renter-occupied housing is
associated with higher risk of displacement
Median gross rent ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04
Lower median gross rent compared to nearby
higher rents is associated with higher risk of
displacement
Overcrowding ACS 5 Year Estimates, DP04 Higher rates of overcrowding are associated
with higher risk of displacement
California Department of Housing and Community Development 45
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Site Inventory
The purpose of the housing element’s site inventory is to identify and analyze specific land (site)
that is available and suitable to accommodate the regional housing need by income group. The site
inventory enables the jurisdiction to determine whether there are sufficient and adequate sites to
accommodate the RHNA by income category. A site inventory and analysis will determine whether
program actions must be adopted to “make sites available” with appropriate zoning, development
standards, and infrastructure capacity to accommodate the new development need.
AB 686 requires a jurisdiction’s site inventory “…shall be used to identify sites throughout the com-
munity, consistent with…” its duty to affirmatively further fair housing.79 Sites must be identified and
evaluated relative to the full scope of the assessment of fair housing (e.g., segregation and integration,
racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, access to opportunity, etc.). The
site inventory and accompanying analysis must identify and analyze selected sites, map the location of
the sites, indicate the number of projected units for each site and represent the assumed affordability
(i.e., lower, moderate and above moderate) for each site, and evaluate relative to socio-economic
patterns. Importantly, the analysis ought not be limited to the identification of sites for lower income
households. Rather, it should incorporate the jurisdiction's projected housing development at all
income levels and assess the extent to which that development will either further entrench or help
to ameliorate existing patterns of segregation and/or exclusion of members of protected categories.
Where the analysis of the inventory indicates that the community has insufficient sites appropriately
zoned and located to accommodate its lower income RHNA in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair
housing, the housing element must include a program to address this inconsistency, such as making
additional sites available to accommodate its lower income RHNA in a manner that affirmatively
furthers fair housing. To evaluate the site inventory’s consistency with the obligation to affirmatively
furthering fair housing, the site inventory analysis should address:
●Improved Conditions: A discussion of how the sites are identified in a manner that better in-
tegrates the community with a consideration for the historical patterns and trends, number of
existing households, the magnitude (e.g., number of units) of the RHNA by income group and
impacts on patterns of socio-economic and racial concentrations.
●Exacerbated Conditions: Similar to above, an explanation of identified sites relative to the
impact on existing patterns of segregation and number of households relative to the magnitude
(e.g., number of units) of the RHNA by income group.
●Isolation of the RHNA: An evaluation of whether the RHNA by income group is concentrated in
areas of the community.
●Local Data and Knowledge: A consideration of current, planned and past developments, invest-
ment, policies, practices, demographic trends, public comment and other factors.
79 Gov. Code, §§ 65583.2, 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A), 8899.50; see also HCD, Building Blocks, at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-
development/building-blocks/index.shtml; 24 C.F.R. § 5.154 (2016).
46 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Other Relevant Factors: Any other factors that influence the impacts of the identification of sites
to accommodate the regional housing need on socio-economic patterns and segregation. This
requirement should address any pending or approved plans, other elements of the general plan
and relevant portions of the housing element and site inventory analysis requirements including,
but not limited to, effectiveness of past programs in achieving the goals of the housing element,
suitability of sites, existing uses and impacts of additional development potential, including
potential for displacement of residents, businesses and other community amenities and infra-
structure capacity.
Summary of Conclusions and Approach to Policies and Programs: Based on the outcomes of
the analysis, the element must summarize conclusions and directly identify policies and programs
needed to address identifying and making available adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA in
a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. Policies and programs must include “meaningful
actions” beyond combating discrimination to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive,
affordable and stable communities.
Specifically, the analysis must include each of the fair housing issue areas: (1) segregation and inte-
gration, (2) racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), (3) access to opportunity,
and (4) disproportionate housing needs, including displacement. The analysis should not be limited
to the jurisdiction itself, but should include the surrounding region and an understanding of the role
the jurisdiction plays in current and historical trends of segregation at a regional level.
Segregation and Integration
The analysis must address identified sites relative to segregation and integration of protected classes.
This analysis may focus on households by income but must address segregation and integration of
other protected classes as well, including population by race, disability and familial status; the analy-
sis must address the effects of economic segregation on members of protected classes. The analysis
must show how the site inventory decreases the segregation index scores for protected classes and
along income within the jurisdiction, as well as the segregation indices at the regional scale. It should
provide an estimate of how much the sites identified are expected to decrease the dissimilarity and
isolation index scores. Furthermore, the analysis should include an evaluation of current and historical
spatial patterns of subsidized housing within and surrounding the jurisdiction, including emergency
shelters, subsidized affordable housing, supportive housing, and usage of housing choice vouchers,
and how the site inventory decreases patterns of segregation given these trends. This analysis of sub-
sidized housing can provide insights into patterns of segregation and integration at a more granular
scale that may prove helpful when U.S. Census data is only available at large geographies like tracts
and block groups.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 47
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Data Considerations: Sample Methodology for Analysis by Income Group (should also be applied
to race, disability and familial status)
1. Identify the percentage of the total local households that are lower, moderate and above moderate
income.
2. A. Calculate the percentage of households in each census tract or block group that are lower,
moderate and above moderate income.
B. As a secondary indicator, identify those tracts or block groups where the percentage of house-
holds at the appropriate income level is significantly higher than the community-wide average.
The actual level chosen should be sensitive to the local context. For example, if a community has a
very low existing percentage of lower income households, an appropriate measure might be block
groups where the percentage of lower income households is double the community-wide average.
In communities where the percentage of existing lower income households is relatively high, then a
standard of 25 or 50 percent higher than the community-wide average may be appropriate. When
tracts or block groups contain relatively small numbers of households, the percentage calculations
will have relatively high margins of error (MOE). MOEs are also included in each record in the LMISD
data. The MOEs should be considered when interpreting the results of this analysis.
3. Identify the existing percentage of LMI households in each block group where there is a residential
capacity targeted to accommodate the RHNA for LMI households.
4. A. Calculate the total percentage of housing units counted towards satisfaction of the RHNA for
lower income households where the existing block group percentage of LMI households exceeds
the overall average for the jurisdiction.
B. Calculate the total percentage of housing units counted towards satisfaction of the RHNA for LMI
households where the existing block group percentage of LMI households exceeds the secondary
standard for concentration of LMI households that is significantly higher than the overall jurisdiction
average.
5. If the percentage of housing units from #4 A. is significantly higher than the percentage from #2
A., and/or if the percentage of housing units from #4 B. is significantly higher than the percentage
from #2 B., then this is an indicator that the site inventory for development of housing for lower
income households is overly concentrated in areas that the housing sites would tend to encourage
over-concentration of lower income households and sites targeted for lower income housing de-
velopment should be better located among tracts or block groups where the percentage of lower
income households is below the exiting citywide average.
6. Analyze local and regional data and knowledge, policies, practices and investments, demographic
trends and other factors.
48 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty and Affluence
The analysis must evaluate both the location of identified sites and the location of capacity (number
of units) by income group relative to racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and afflu-
ence. The analysis should address whether sites are located in or near areas of concentrated poverty
and race and affluence, and whether the identified sites significantly concentrate capacity (number
of units) to accommodate lower income households in or near racially and ethnically concentrated
areas of poverty. The analysis should also evaluate the relationship between the location where the
capacity for the lower-income housing need is accommodated in comparison to the housing need for
above moderate income households. For example, whether sites to accommodate above moderate
income households are significantly concentrated in areas of affluence. This analysis of R/ECAPs and
RCAAs should include looking at neighborhoods of the jurisdiction where there are no identified
sites in the site inventory and evaluating if the absence of sites in those neighborhoods perpetuates
patterns of R/ECAPs or RCAAs.
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
The analysis must address the location of identified sites and the location of capacity (number of
units) by income group relative to overall access to opportunity and various categories of access to
opportunity (e.g., education, transportation, employment, environment). The analysis should not only
address an overall score value of access to opportunity, but must also individually address access to
education, transportation, economic prosperity, areas with low rates of violent crime, parks and rec-
reation areas, environmentally healthy neighborhoods and other important opportunities. This is an
important place to include local data, such as school performance and enrollment boundaries, local
bicycle and pedestrian data, and access to critical local and cultural institutions if available, although
the analysis should extend beyond the jurisdiction’s boundaries when considering access to opportu-
nity. This analysis should be quantitative where possible and qualitative at least to guide appropriate
goals and actions resulting from the analysis. Even where information about these indicators of op-
portunity is more qualitative or anecdotal than quantitative, it is a valuable and necessary component
of developing appropriate actions.
Local jurisdictions using the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps should note that rural areas are scored
relative to other rural areas in the same county, meaning they are not scored on the same scale as
non-rural areas. This is important to note in jurisdictions that include a mix of rural and non-rural
areas. While the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps provide data at a block group level in rural areas,
data tools for rural areas and lower population areas sometimes do not fully capture the nuance of
the socio-economic patterns, which highlights the importance of using local data and knowledge as
a complement.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 49
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Disproportionate Housing Needs, including Displacement Risk
The identification of sites should be informed by the findings of the disproportionate housing needs
section of the assessment of fair housing. To analyze sites relative to disproportionate housing needs,
including displacement risk, a locality must identify and evaluate sites according to cost burdens,
overcrowding and substandard housing. This analysis must also address displacement risks as well as
any other disproportionate housing needs addressed in the assessment of fair housing based on local
data and knowledge. Factors of disproportionate housing need (e.g., overpayment, overcrowding,
displacement, etc.) may be considered together to the extent there is a significant coincidence. The
analysis must also address ways in which development of the identified sites will impact displacement
risk. Where development of the identified sites is likely to increase displacement risk, then the ele-
ment must include programs to mitigate the risks and impacts of displacement.
Identification and Prioritization of Contributing
Factors
The housing element must include an identification and prioritization of significant contributing
factors to segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to
opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs. Fair housing contributing factor (or contributing
factor) means a factor that creates, contributes to, perpetuates, or increases the severity of one or
more fair housing issues. See “Part 3: Resources” for examples of contributing factors by fair housing
issue area. Contributing factors should be based on all the prior efforts and analyses: outreach,
assessment of fair housing, and site inventory. Contributing factors must also be prioritized in terms
of needed impact on fair housing choice and strongly connect to goals and actions.
The identification and evaluation of contributing factors must:
●Identify fair housing issues and significant contributing factors;
●Prioritize contributing factors, including any local information and knowledge, giving highest
priority to those factors that most limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity or
negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance; and
●Discuss strategic approaches to inform and strongly connect to goals and actions.
For more information, see “Part 3: Resources” (Sample Contributing Factors and Action Matrix)
50 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Chart 2: Contributing Factors Relationship Between Assessment of
Fair Housing and Goals and Actions
California Department of Housing and Community Development 51
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
The Importance of Prioritization
In any given community, there will be several contributing factors. However, listing contributing
factors without analysis will not result in meaningful actions. For example, a list of 50 contribut-
ing factors that are not analyzed will likely result in less guided and impactful goals and actions.
Instead, the housing element must prioritize contributing factors and should consider a man-
ageable list (e.g., 4-6) to strongly connect to goals and actions, focus resources and maximize
impact in the planning period. Further, the element should consider regular evaluation of the
effectiveness of goals and actions and adjust and re-prioritize contributing factors and goals
and actions as necessary.
Contributing factors are not limited to public actions. Private actions can also contribute to patterns
of segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to oppor-
tunity, and disproportionate housing needs. While public agencies do not directly control private
actions or contributing factors beyond a locality’s boundaries, the actions of public agencies can
influence private action and have impacts beyond local boundaries. As a result, regardless of whether
contributing factors are public or private or local, region, state or federal, the housing element must
recognize a broader social and legal obligation to affirmatively further fair housing and still identify
and prioritize those contributing factors to commit to commensurate goals and actions.
Using Other Consolidated Plan Documents
Localities may utilize an assessment of fair housing or analysis of impediments created pursuant to
past federal requirements to identify and prioritize contributing factors to fair housing issues. Also,
the statewide analysis of impediments and, if available, a regional analysis of impediments may be
useful. While these documents may be a sufficient starting point, in all cases, contributing factors
must be tailored to local conditions or must be re-evaluated and prioritized based on the assessment
of fair housing in the housing element. Note that information in an AFH or AI may also be outdated or
incomplete depending on how recently that information was prepared and may need to be updated.
Goals, Policies, and Actions
The housing element must include goals, policies and most specifically, a schedule of actions during
the planning period. Actions must be specific with timelines, discrete steps and measurable out-
comes to have a “beneficial impact” during the planning period. The schedule of actions must reflect
the results of analyses and is intended to be adequate to address the housing needs of all economic
segments of the community. The schedule of actions must address the following statutory areas:
●Identify adequate sites, with appropriate zoning and development standards and services to
accommodate the locality’s share of the regional housing needs for each income level;
●Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-,
low-, and moderate-income households;
52 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Address and, where possible, remove governmental and non-governmental constraints to the
maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for people at all
income levels, as well as housing for people with disabilities and providing reasonable accom-
modation;
●Conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock;
●Preserve assisted housing developments at risk of conversion to market rate;
●Promote housing opportunities throughout the community or communities for all persons re-
gardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or
disability, and other characteristics; and
●Develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of accessory dwelling units that can
be offered at an affordable rent.
What is “Beneficial Impact”
Programs in the element must have specific commitment to deliverables, measurable metrics or
objectives, definitive deadlines, dates, or benchmarks for implementation. Deliverables should
occur early in the planning period to ensure actual housing outcomes. For example, programs
to “explore” or “consider” on an “ongoing” basis are inadequate to demonstrate a beneficial
impact in the planning period. Conversely, a program with clear and specific commitment and
numerical objectives such as “rezone 50 acres to high density by June 2022” is adequate to
demonstrate a beneficial impact. This specific and clear commitment combined with numer-
ical objectives and timelines is called “beneficial impact.” Similarly, programs to affirmatively
furthering fair housing must have specific and clear commitment, milestones, and metrics or
numerical and anticipated outcomes.
Goals and Policies
Goals and policies typically are utilized to determine a direction in the implementation of a sched-
ule of actions. Through this direction, actions can be interpreted, prioritized, adjusted and carried
out to best achieve the necessary outcomes to address the identified needs without re-evaluating
over-arching principles or re-starting legislative or complex policy-making processes. To affirmatively
further fair housing, goals and policies must have a specific connection to outreach, the assessment of
fair housing, the analysis of the site inventory and most importantly, the prioritization of contributing
factors to fair housing issues. Goals, policies and actions must be aggressively set to overcome those
contributing factors to meet the “meaningful impact” requirement in statute and to avoid actions that
are materially inconsistent with the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. Goals and policies
must be created with the intention to have a significant impact, well beyond a continuation of past
actions, and to provide direction and guidance for meaningful action.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 53
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
What If Goals Are Outside of Local Control?
Goals should be set regardless of whether a locality directly controls all the factors involved in
achieving that goal. A locality’s ability to influence may be a consideration in development of
actions but should not limit setting goals. Instead, recognizing the ability or inability to influence
a goal should be a starting point for forming appropriate policies and actions. For example,
a locality might have limited financial and staff resources. Instead of setting goals and actions
at an inadequate level due to limited resources, localities should recognize this constraint and
form policies and actions accordingly, such as building partnerships with non-profits to explore
all private and public funding available, creating coalitions, working with legislators, exploring
all private and public funding available, collaborating with nearby localities and seeking tech-
nical assistance.
Goals and policies to affirmatively further fair housing do not need to be independent or isolated
on a contributing factor. Instead, goals and policies can be integrated with other goals and policies
required by the housing element. For example, a housing element could have a program to “Improve
housing supply.” On the other hand, an integrated program could “Improve and integrate housing
supply, choices and affordability throughout the community.” Goals and policies intended to affirma-
tively further fair housing should be described as such. By integrating goals and policies, a locality
can leverage efforts for a broader and more significant impact while better reflecting more inclusive
values.
Actions
Actions implement goals and consist of concrete steps, timelines and measurable outcomes. Actions
should be considered a part of the schedule of actions or programs required by Housing Element
Law and must affirmatively further fair housing pursuant to Government Code section 8899.50. Spe-
cifically, Government Code section 8899.50 requires “meaningful actions” well beyond combating
discrimination to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. These actions,
as a whole, must:
●Address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity;
●Replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns;
●Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity; and
●Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
Further, local agencies shall not take any action materially inconsistent with the obligation to affirma-
tively further fair housing. This requirement should apply to all actions in the housing element and
the rest of the general plan as well as any actions, policies or practices outside of the general plan.
54 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Action Areas
Actions to affirmatively further fair housing may include, but are not limited to:
●Enhancing housing mobility strategies;
●Encouraging development of new affordable housing in high resource areas;
●Improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization,
including preservation of existing affordable housing; and
●Protecting existing residents from displacement.
While the goals, policies and actions may select from the above areas (e.g., mobility, housing in
high resource areas, place-based, protection from displacement), actions must be formulated in a
manner to address the full scope of outreach, assessment of fair housing, analysis of site inventory
and overcome contributing factors to fair housing. As a result, a schedule of actions generally must
address all four categories.
For examples of affirmatively furthering fair housing actions by each of the action areas, see “Part 3:
Resources.”
Using a Variety of Actions
To address the full scope of outreach, complete the assessment of fair housing, and overcome con-
tributing factors to fair housing and affirmatively further fair housing, actions must consider a wide
range of actions across all action areas (e.g., mobility, housing in high resource areas, place-based
and protection from displacement). The number and scale of actions will depend on the severity
of the needs but regardless of need, a cohesive and effective program will consider multiple ac-
tion areas. For example, a place-based approach might improve infrastructure or invest in active
transportation, but those efforts would be ineffective in addressing needs without complementary
anti-displacement measures.
Further, a balanced and effective approach will consider different types of actions utilizing: (1) human
resources: outreach, education, marketing, collaboration, (2) land use resources: planning documents
such as general plans, zoning, specific plans, ordinances and procedures, and (3) financial resources.
A balanced and effective approach will consider and combine each of these areas. For example, an
approach could include marketing and collaboration as part of increasing mobility, zoning to increase
housing choices in high resource areas, and investing financial resources in place-based and displace-
ment action areas. An effective approach will also seek to combine these types within an action area.
For example, a locality might take a zoning and financial resources approach to displacement risks
or creating new housing choices in high resource areas. By combining these action areas, a program
will be more balanced and more effective in achieving the goals to affirmatively further fair housing.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 55
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Milestones, Objectives, Monitoring and Making Adjustments
Specific actions with timelines and measurable or numerical objectives are essential to an effective
approach. Successful outcomes will not be achievable and discernable without specificity. For exam-
ple, a program to “explore feasibility on an ongoing basis” does little to achieve tangible results but
a commitment to “rezone 50 acres to the high density district by October 2021” has a far more likeli-
hood of producing results. In addition, measurable or numerical objectives clarify goals and serve as
a reference point for monitoring the effectiveness of programs. As part of the annual progress report
(Gov. Code, § 65400), localities, through a community process, should evaluate actions for progress
toward goals and objectives and effectiveness to make regular adjustments as necessary.
Integrating Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing into Existing Housing
Element Programs
Housing elements must include actions to address statutory areas, such as identifying adequate
sites to accommodate the regional housing need, assisting in the development of housing for lower
income households and households with special needs, and conserving and improving the existing
housing stock. 80 These statutory program areas can be modified to complement the statutorily
required affirmatively furthering fair housing programs. 81 Examples include:
●Adequate Sites: In some cases, housing elements will include programs to rezone to address a
shortfall of sites to accommodate the regional housing need. These types of programs should be
carried out where possible to promote more inclusive communities. In addition, in some cases,
a locality might find circumstances warranting rezoning above and beyond the regional housing
need to promote more housing choices and affordability. Examples include long held patterns of
isolation in higher income areas, or other factors, or when identifying sites to accommodate the
housing need for lower income households exacerbates segregation.
●Assist in Development of Housing for Lower Income Households and Households with
Special Needs: Housing elements will include programs to encourage affordable development,
such as utilizing, seeking or supporting funding, building partnerships with non-profit developers
and incentives for affordability. These programs can be targeted to high resource areas or other
similar areas to promote inclusive communities.
●Addressing Governmental and Non-governmental Constraints: Land use and zoning can be a
key barrier to inclusive communities. Zoning, permit processing, fees and other land use reforms
can be targeted geographically to promote more inclusive communities. Non-governmental
constraints can include factors such as local opposition to affordable housing. Education and
other programs can be geographically targeted to build campaigns for more integrated land use
patterns.
80 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subd. (a)(3) , 65583.2; see also HCD, Building Blocks at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-
blocks/index.shtml.
81 Gov. Code, §§ 8899.50, 65583, subd. (c).
56 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Conserve and Improve the Existing Affordable Housing Stock: Elements must have actions
to conserve and improve the existing affordable housing stock. Typical actions include programs
for rehabilitation (renter, owner), acquisition and rehabilitation, infrastructure investment, conser-
vation of mobilehome parks, housing choice vouchers, and administrative actions like zoning or
displacement policies. These types of programs can be geographically targeted as place-based
strategies to revitalize and improve communities or as new opportunities in high opportunity
areas.
●Incentivize Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): Programs to incentivize ADUs can be targeted as
new opportunities in high resource areas or as place-based revitalization strategies.
Integrating Goals, Policies and Actions across Multiple Planning
Objectives
Various policy topics can be integrated where more than one objective is considered at a time to
promote more balanced approaches and multiple benefits. The intent is to align objectives and set
clearer direction to avoid future conflict. Various policy topics can be considered within the housing
element and also across the general plan. For example, a goal or policy could be set to both identify
adequate sites to accommodate the regional housing need and affirmatively furthering fair housing.
Also, a housing issue could be considered at the same time as a circulation or safety issue. Through
more integrated approaches, the general plan becomes a more cohesive, internally consistent and
implementable plan. For examples of integrated concepts in the general plan, please review resourc-
es developed by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. In addition, See “Part 3: Resources”
for a matrix of policy topics and integrated planning approaches.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 57
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Part 3:
Resources
Statute (strikeout/underline)
Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code, Chapter 15
Government Code Section 8899.50 (Additions and Deletions in Strikeout/Underline)
Section 8899.50. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1) “Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating
discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from
barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affir-
matively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address
significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living
patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically
concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compli-
ance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to
all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development.
(2) “Public agency” means all of the following:
(A) The state, including every state office, officer, department, division, bureau, board, and commis-
sion, including the California State University.
(B) A city, including a charter city, county, including a charter county, city and county, and a redevel-
opment successor agency.
(C) A public housing authority created pursuant to the Housing Authorities Law (Chapter 1 (com-
mencing with Section 34200) of Part 2 of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code).
(D) A public housing agency, as defined in the United States Housing Act of 1937 (codified at 42
U.S.C. Sec. 1437 et seq.), as amended.
(E) Any other political subdivision of the state that is a grantee or subgrantee receiving funds provid-
ed by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Community
Development Block Grant program, the Emergency Solutions Grants program, the HOME Invest-
ment Partnerships program, or the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS program.
(b) A public agency shall administer its programs and activities relating to housing and community
development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing, and take no action that is materially
inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.
58 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
(c) This section shall be interpreted consistent with the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Final
Rule and accompanying commentary published by the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development contained in Volume 80 of the Federal Register, Number 136, pages 42272
to 42371, inclusive, dated July 16, 2015. Subsequent amendment, suspension, or revocation of
this Final Rule or its accompanying commentary by the federal government shall not impact the
interpretation of this section.
(d) In selecting meaningful actions to fulfill the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing, this
section does not require a public agency to take, or prohibit a public agency from taking, any one
particular action.
Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, Chapter 3
Government Code Section 65583 (Additions and Deletions in Strikeout/Underline)
Section 65583. The housing element shall consist of an identification and analysis of existing and
projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resourc-
es, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The
housing element shall identify adequate sites for housing, including rental housing, factory-built
housing, mobilehomes, and emergency shelters, and shall make adequate provision for the existing
and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. The element shall contain all of the
following:
(a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the
meeting of these needs. The assessment and inventory shall include all of the following:
(1) through (9) Omitted – No substantive changes.
(b) (1) through (2) Omitted – No substantive changes.
(c) A program which that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with
a timeline for implementation, which that may recognize that certain programs are ongoing,
such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the
local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve
the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use and
development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, the utilization of
appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when available, and the utilization
of moneys in a low- and moderate-income housing fund of an agency if the locality has estab-
lished a redevelopment project area pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Division
24 (commencing with Section 33000) of the Health and Safety Code). In order to make adequate
provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the program shall
do all of the following:
(1) Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with ap-
propriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate
that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level
California Department of Housing and Community Development 59
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to
paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Section
65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a
variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built
housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room
occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing.
(A) Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify ad-
equate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to
Section 65584, rezoning of those sites, including adoption of minimum density and development
standards, for jurisdictions with an eight-year housing element planning period pursuant to Sec-
tion 65588, shall be completed no later than three years after either the date the housing element
is adopted pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 65585 or the date that is 90 days after receipt of
comments from the department pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65585, whichever is earlier,
unless the deadline is extended pursuant to subdivision (f). Notwithstanding the foregoing, for a
local government that fails to adopt a housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline
in Section 65588 for adoption of the housing element, rezoning of those sites, including adoption
of minimum density and development standards, shall be completed no later than three years
and 120 days from the statutory deadline in Section 65588 for adoption of the housing element.
(B) Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify ad-
equate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to
Section 65584, the program shall identify sites that can be developed for housing within the
planning period pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 65583.2. The identification of sites shall
include all components specified in Section 65583.2.
(C) Where the inventory of sites pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) does not identify ade-
quate sites to accommodate the need for farmworker housing, the program shall provide for suf-
ficient sites to meet the need with zoning that permits farmworker housing use by right, including
density and development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of the
development of farmworker housing for low- and very low income households.
(2) Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low, very low,
low-, and moderate-income households.
(3) Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovern-
mental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including
housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove
constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for
occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities.
(4) Conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock, which may include
addressing ways to mitigate the loss of dwelling units demolished by public or private action.
(5) Promote housing opportunities and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote
housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion,
sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability. disability, and
60 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
other characteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8
(commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Section 65008, and any other state and
federal fair housing and planning law.
(6) Preserve for lower income households the assisted housing developments identified pursuant
to paragraph (9) of subdivision (a). The program for preservation of the assisted housing devel-
opments shall utilize, to the extent necessary, all available federal, state, and local financing and
subsidy programs identified in paragraph (9) of subdivision (a), except where a community has
other urgent needs for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program may
include strategies that involve local regulation and technical assistance.
(7) Include an identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the
various actions and the means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan
elements and community goals.
(8) Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic
segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall
describe this effort.
(9) (A) Affirmatively further fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section
8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2. The program shall include an assessment of fair housing in the
jurisdiction that shall include all of the following components:
(i) A summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair
housing enforcement and fair housing outreach capacity.
(ii) An analysis of available federal, state, and local data and knowledge to identify integration and
segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities
in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction, including
displacement risk.
(iii) An assessment of the contributing factors for the fair housing issues identified under clause (ii).
(iv) An identification of the jurisdiction’s fair housing priorities and goals, giving highest priority to
those factors identified in clause (iii) that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportu-
nity, or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance, and identifying the metrics and
milestones for determining what fair housing results will be achieved.
(v) Strategies and actions to implement those priorities and goals, which may include, but are not lim-
ited to, enhancing mobility strategies and encouraging development of new affordable housing
in areas of opportunity, as well as place-based strategies to encourage community revitalization,
including preservation of existing affordable housing, and protecting existing residents from
displacement.
(B) A jurisdiction that completes or revises an assessment of fair housing pursuant to Subpart A
(commencing with Section 5.150) of Part 5 of Subtitle A of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regula-
tions, as published in Volume 80 of the Federal Register, Number 136, page 42272, dated July 16,
2015, or an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice in accordance with the requirements of
California Department of Housing and Community Development 61
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Section 91.225 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations in effect prior to August 17, 2015,
may incorporate relevant portions of that assessment or revised assessment of fair housing or
analysis or revised analysis of impediments to fair housing into its housing element.
(C) The requirements of this paragraph shall apply to housing elements due to be revised pursuant
to Section 65588 on or after January 1, 2021.
(d) through (f) omitted – No substantive changes.
Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, Chapter 3
Government Code Section 65583.2 (Additions and Deletions in Strikeout/Underline)
65583.2. (a) A city’s or county’s inventory of land suitable for residential development pursuant to
paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 shall be used to identify sites throughout the com-
munity, consistent with paragraph (9) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583, that can be developed for
housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction’s share of
the regional housing need for all income levels pursuant to Section 65584. As used in this section,
“land suitable for residential development” includes all of the sites that meet the standards set forth
in subdivisions (c) and (g):
(1) Vacant sites zoned for residential use.
(2) Vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allows residential development.
(3) Residentially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher density, including the
airspace above sites owned or leased by a city, county, or city and county.
(4) Sites zoned for nonresidential use that can be redeveloped for residential use, and for which
the housing element includes a program to rezone the site, as necessary, rezoned for, to permit
residential use, including sites owned or leased by a city, county, or city and county.
(b) Through (l) omitted – No substantive changes.
62 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
AB 686 Housing Element Compliance Checklist
Part 1 Outreach:
Does the element describe and incorporate meaningful engagement that represents all segments
of the community into the development of the housing element, including goals and actions (e.g.,
language access, accessibility for persons with disabilities, resident engagement, including low
income residents and residents in subsidized housing programs, description of comments and
whether incorporated, and outreach to fair housing agencies, legal services and public housing
agencies)?
Part 2 Assessment of Fair Housing:
Does the element include a summary of fair housing enforcement and capacity in the jurisdiction?
Does the element include an analysis of these five areas: Fair housing and enforcement capacity?
Integration and segregation patterns and trends? Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of
poverty? Disparities in access to opportunity? And disproportionate housing needs within the
jurisdiction, including displacement risk? Each of these four areas must have its own analysis.
Each analysis on the four fair
housing issue areas should include
the following:
Fair Housing
Enforcement
and Capacity
Segregation and
Integration R/ECAP Access to
opportunity
Disp. Housing
needs
+displacement
risk
Patterns and trends – local and
regional
Local data and knowledge
Other relevant factors
Conclusions and summary of issues
California Department of Housing and Community Development 63
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Part 3 Site Inventory:
Did the element identify and evaluate (e.g., maps) the number of units, location and assumed
affordability of identified sites throughout the community (i.e., lower, moderate, and above mod-
erate income RHNA) relative to all components of the assessment of fair housing?
Did the element analyze identified sites related to improving or exacerbating conditions for each
of the fair housing areas (integration and segregation, racially and ethnically concentrated areas
of poverty, areas of opportunity, disproportionate housing needs, including displacement)?
Part 4 Identification of Contributing Factors
Did the element identify, evaluate and prioritize the contributing factors to fair housing issues?
Did the element prioritize those factors that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to oppor-
tunity, or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance?
Part 5 Goals and Actions
Did the element identify goals and actions based on the identified and prioritized contributing
factors?
Do goals and actions address mobility enhancement, new housing choices and affordability in
high opportunity areas, place-based strategies for preservation and revitalization, displacement
protection, and other program areas?
Are actions significant, meaningful and sufficient to overcome identified patterns of segregation
and affirmatively further fair housing?
Did the element include metrics and milestones for evaluating progress on programs/actions and
fair housing results, including concrete timelines?
64 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Definitions
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation
and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on
protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful
actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to op-
portunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns,
transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and
fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively
further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and
community development.82
Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH)
An analysis undertaken pursuant to 24 CFR § 5.154 that includes an analysis of fair housing data,
an assessment of fair housing issues and contributing factors, and an identification of fair housing
priorities and goals, and is conducted and submitted to HUD using the Assessment Tool. The AFH
may be conducted and submitted by an individual program participant (individual AFH), or may be
a single AFH conducted and submitted by two or more program participants (joint AFH), or two or
more program participants, where at least two of which are consolidated plan program participants
(regional AFH).83
Community Participation
As required in 24 CFR § 5.158, means a solicitation of views and recommendations from members
of the community and other interested parties, a consideration of the views and recommendations
received, and a process for incorporating such views and recommendations into decisions and out-
comes. For HUD regulations implementing the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,
the statutory term for ‘‘community participation’’ is ‘‘citizen participation.’’84
Contributing Factor
A factor that creates, contributes to, perpetuates, or increases the severity of one or more fair housing
issues. Goals in an AFH are designed to overcome one or more contributing factors and related fair
housing issues as provided in 24 CFR § 5.154.85
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Defined by the AFFH Final Rule as “substantial and measurable differences in access to educational,
transportation, economic, and other opportunities in a community based on protected class related
to housing.”86
82 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(1).
83 24 C.F.R. §5.152 (2016).
84 bid.
85 Ibid.
86 Ibid.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 65
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Disproportionate Housing Needs
Generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members
of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of
members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing
need in the applicable geographic area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing need
are based on such factors as cost burden, severe cost burden, overcrowding, tenure (own vs. rent),
homelessness, and substandard housing conditions.
Fair Housing Choice
Under the AFFH Final Rule, fair housing choice means that individuals and families have the informa-
tion, opportunity, and options to live where they choose without unlawful discrimination and other
barriers related to race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or disability. Fair housing
choice encompasses:
●Actual choice, which means the existence of realistic housing options;
●Protected choice, which means housing that can be accessed without discrimination;
●Enabled choice, which means realistic access to sufficient information regarding options so that
any choice is informed. For persons with disabilities, fair housing choice and access to opportu-
nity include access to accessible housing and housing in the most integrated setting appropriate
to an individual’s needs, as required under Federal civil rights law, including disability-related
services that an individual needs to live in such housing.
Fair Housing Issue
A condition in a program participants geographic area of analysis that restricts fair housing choice
or access to opportunity, and includes such conditions as ongoing local or regional segregation or
lack of integration, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, significant disparities in access
to opportunity, disproportionate housing needs, and evidence of discrimination or violations of civil
rights law or regulations related to housing.87
Integration
A condition within the program participants geographic areas of analysis, as guided by the AFFH Data
Viewer, in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex,
familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a type of disability in a particular geographic
area when compared to a broader geographic area.” 88
Land Value Recapture
A policy approach by which communities can recover and reinvest land value increases that result
from public investment and other government actions, including re-zoning. This can include things
such as requiring community benefits from landowners and developers whose land has increased in
value due to government actions, public benefit zoning, incentive zoning, density bonuses, housing
overlay zoning, tax increment financing, community benefits agreements, special assessment dis-
tricts, transferable development rights, linkage or impact fees, and others.
87 Ibid.
88 Ibid.
66 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Meaningful Action
Significant actions that are designed and can be reasonably expected to achieve a material positive
change that affirmatively furthers fair housing by, for example, increasing fair housing choice or de-
creasing disparities in access to opportunity.89
Public Agency
Means all of the following:
A. The state, including every state office, officer, department, division, bureau, board, and commission,
including the California State University.
B. A city, including a charter city, county, including a charter county, city and county, and a redevelop-
ment successor agency.
C. A public housing authority created pursuant to the Housing Authorities Law (Chapter 1 (commenc-
ing with Section 34200) of Part 2 of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code).
D. A public housing agency, as defined in the United States Housing Act of 1937 (codified at 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1437 et seq.), as amended.
E. Any other political subdivision of the state that is a grantee or subgrantee receiving funds provided
by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Community De-
velopment Block Grant program, the Emergency Solutions Grants program, the HOME Investment
Partnerships program, or the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS program.90
Segregation
A condition within the program participant’s geographic area of analysis....in which there is a high
concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or
having a disability or a type of disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a broader
geographic area.91
89 Ibid.
90 Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(2).
91 24 C.F.R. §5.152 (2016).
California Department of Housing and Community Development 67
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Dissimilarity and Isolation Index Formulas
Dissimilarity Index: This index measures the evenness with which two groups (frequently defined
on racial or ethnic characteristics) are distributed across the geographic units, such as block groups
within a community. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 meaning no segregation and 100 indi-
cating complete segregation between the two groups. The index score can be understood as the
percentage of one of the two groups that would need to move to produce an even distribution
of racial/ethnic groups within the specified area. An index score above 60 is considered high (i.e.:
60 percent of people would need to move to eliminate segregation), while 30 to 60 is considered
moderate, and below 30 is considered low.92
The formula for calculating the dissimilarity index, by Census block group, is as follows:
●Pig is the population of group g in Census block group i
●Pih is the population of group h in Census block group i
●Pg is the total population of group g in the City
●Ph is the total population of group h in the City
Isolation Index: Ranging from 0 to 100, the isolation index represents the percentage of residents of
a given race or ethnicity in a block group where the average resident of that group lives, correcting
for the fact that this number increases mechanically with that group’s share of the overall citywide
population. Using Hispanic or Latino residents as an example, an aggregate isolation index of 40
indicates that the average Hispanic or Latino resident lives in a block group where the Hispanic
share of the population exceeds the overall citywide average by roughly 40 percent. Isolation index
values that equal close to zero indicate that members of that BIPOC group live in relatively integrated
neighborhoods.93 94
The formula for calculating the isolation index, by Census block group, is as follows:
●Pig is the population of group g in Census block group i
●Pit is the total population in Census block group i
●Pg is the total population of group g in the City
●Pt is the total population in the City
92 Massey, D.S. and N.A. Denton. (1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
93 HUD. (2013). AFFH Data Documentation. Available at: http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/pdf/FR-5173-P-01_AFFH_data_
documentation.pdf
94 Glaeser, E. and Vigdor, J. (2001). Racial Segregation in the 2000 Census: Promising News. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution,
Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/glaeser.pdf
68 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Local jurisdictions should use the dissimilarity index and/or isolation index tools as part of the needs
assessment to help to understand where there are areas of segregation in the community and high-
light needs for housing element policies and programs to help reduce segregation. Dissimilarity
index and Isolation index values for census tracts within the jurisdiction can be mapped thematically
to highlight areas with high levels of segregation. This will highlight locations within the community
where there are needs for housing element policies and programs to promote better racial and ethnic
integration and reduce segregation.
Examples of Contributing Factors to Fair
Housing Issues by Area
Outreach
●Lack of a variety of media (e.g., meetings, surveys, stakeholder interviews)
●Lack of marketing community meetings
●Lack of meetings at various times
●Lack of accessibility to draft documents
●Lack of language access
●Lack of accessible forums (e.g., webcast, effective communication, reasonable accommodation
procedures)
Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
●Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement
●Lack of local public fair housing enforcement
●Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations
●Lack of state or local fair housing laws to support strong enforcement
●Unresolved violations of fair housing or civil rights law (including challenges to protect the consti-
tutional and statutory rights of unhoused people)
Segregation and Integration
●Community opposition
●Displacement of residents due to economic pressures
●Lack of community revitalization strategies
●Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods
●Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities
●Lack of regional cooperation
●Land use and zoning laws
●Lending discrimination
●Location and type of affordable housing
●Occupancy codes and restrictions
●Private discrimination
●Source of income discrimination
●Lack of tenant protections
●Harassment
●Lack of supportive housing in community-based settings
●Policing and criminalization
California Department of Housing and Community Development 69
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
●Community opposition
●Deteriorated and abandoned properties
●Displacement of residents due to economic pressures
●Lack of community revitalization strategies
●Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods
●Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities
●Lack of regional cooperation
●Land use and zoning laws
●Location and type of affordable housing
●Occupancy codes and restrictions
●Private discrimination
●Lending discrimination
●Policing and criminalization
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
●Access to financial services
●The availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation
●Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods
●Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities
●Lack of regional cooperation
●Land use and zoning laws
●Lending discrimination
●Location of employers
●Location of environmental health hazards
●Location of proficient schools and school assignment policies
●Location and type of affordable housing
●Occupancy codes and restrictions
●Private discrimination
●Policing and criminalization
Disparities in Access to Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities
●Access to proficient schools for persons with disabilities
●Access to publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities
●Access to transportation for persons with disabilities
●Inaccessible government facilities or services
●Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure
●Lack of affordable in-home or community-based supportive services
●Lack of affordable, accessible housing in range of unit sizes
●Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive services
●Lack of assistance for housing accessibility modifications
●Lack of assistance for transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing
●Land use and zoning laws
●Lending discrimination
●Location of accessible housing
70 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Occupancy codes and restrictions
●Lack of effective accommodations for unhoused people with disabilities
●Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for persons with disabilities
●State or local laws, policies, or practices that discourage individuals with disabilities from being
placed in or living in apartments, family homes, and other integrated settings
●Policing and criminalization (especially people with mental disabilities or neurodivergent individ-
uals)
Disproportionate Housing Needs, Including Displacement Risks
●The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes
●Displacement of residents due to economic pressures
●Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods
●Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities
●Lack of renter protections
●Lack of protections for mobilehome park residents
●Land use and zoning laws
●Lending discrimination
●Lack of rental relief programs for people at risk of homelessness
Site Inventory
●Community opposition
●Lack of community revitalization strategies
●Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods
●Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities
●Lack of regional cooperation
●Land use and zoning laws
●Local policies or practices (e.g., councilmember veto)
●Location and type of affordable housing
●Private discrimination
California Department of Housing and Community Development 71
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Sample Contributing Factors & Actions Matrix
Identified Fair
Housing Issue
Contributing
Factor
Priority
(high, medium, low)Meaningful Action
72 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Examples of Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing Actions
Housing Mobility Strategies consist of removing barriers to housing in areas of opportunity and
strategically enhancing access. Examples include:
●Voucher mobility
●Housing mobility counseling
●City-wide affordable rental registries
●Landlord outreach to expand the location of participating voucher properties
●Landlord education and outreach on source of income discrimination and voucher programs
●Assistance with security deposits and moving expenses for voucher holders and other low-in-
come tenants
●Extend search times for particular groups with housing choice vouchers, such as larger families
with children or persons with disabilities
●Regional cooperation and administration of vouchers (such as through portability and shared
waiting lists);
●Affirmative marketing can be targeted at promoting equal access to government-assisted hous-
ing or to promote housing outside the immediate neighborhood to increase awareness and the
diversity of individuals in the neighborhood
●Collaborate with high performing school districts to promote a diversity of students and staff to
serve lower income students
●Developing multifamily housing opportunities95
●Encouraging the development of four or more units in a building
●Encouraging collaboration between local governments and community land trusts as a mecha-
nism to develop affordable housing in higher-opportunity areas.96
●Accessibility programs focus on improving access to housing, transit, public buildings and facili-
ties, sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, and businesses
New Housing Choices and Affordability in Areas of Opportunity means promoting housing
supply, choices and affordability in areas of high opportunity and outside of areas of concentrated
poverty. Examples include:
●Zoning, permit streamlining, fees, incentives and other approaches to increase housing choices
and affordability (e.g., duplex, triplex, multifamily, accessory dwelling units, transitional and sup-
portive housing, group homes) in high opportunity areas
●Target housing creation or mixed income strategies (e.g., funding, incentives, policies and pro-
grams, density bonuses, land banks, housing trust funds)
●Inclusionary requirements
95 The federal FHA includes design and construction requirements for all residential buildings with four or more attached units. In buildings
with stairs, all ground floor units must be accessible, and in buildings with elevator access, all units must have minimum access. There is
no federally mandated standard for accessibility in single family homes. Government Code section 12955.1, subdivision (b), requires 10
percent of units in multifamily buildings without elevators consisting of 3 or more rental units or 4 or more condominium units are subject to
accessibility building standards.
96 See Community Land Trusts and Stable Affordable Housing, available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-featd-
article-110419.html, last visited on March 19, 2021.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 73
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●Scattered site affordable development
●Targeted investment and programs, including sweat equity, down payment assistance, new rental
construction
●Accessibility modification programs and other measures that proactively enhance accessibility
●Increase accessible number of units above state law through incentives, policies, funding and
other similar measures
●Developing waiting lists for persons with disabilities, such as coordination with regional centers
for developmental services and targeting those lists to property owners or homeowners making
units (e.g., ADUs) available
●Leveraging in-home or community based supportive services
●Develop a campaign to combat local opposition
●Increase number of ADUs allowed per site
●Increasing opportunities for community ownership of housing
Place-based Strategies to Encourage Community Conservation and Revitalization Involves
approaches that are focused on conserving and improving assets in areas of lower opportunity
and concentrated poverty such as targeted investment in neighborhood revitalization, preserving
or rehabilitating existing affordable housing, improving infrastructure, schools, employment, parks,
transportation and other community amenities. Examples include:
●Targeted investment in areas of most need focused on improving community assets such as
schools, recreational facilities and programs, social service programs, parks, streets, active trans-
portation and infrastructure
●Develop a proactive code enforcement program that targets areas of concentrated rehabilitation
needs, results in repairs and mitigates potential cost, displacement and relocation impacts on
residents
●Dedicate or seek funding to prioritize basic infrastructure improvements (e.g., water, sewer) in
disadvantaged communities
●Address negative environmental, neighborhood, housing and health impacts associated with
siting and operation of land uses such as industrial, agricultural, waste storage, freeways, energy
production, etc. in disadvantaged communities
●Address negative impacts from climate change through investments in adaptation measures such
as urban forestry, flood prevention measures, etc. in disadvantaged communities
●Target acquisition and rehabilitation to vacant and blighted properties in neighborhoods of
concentrated poverty
●Inter-governmental coordination on areas of high need
●Prioritized capital improvement programs
●Develop new financing
●Recruit residents from areas of concentrated poverty to serve on boards, committees, task forces
and other local government decision-making bodies
●Catalyze leadership and future community wide decision-makers, including affirmative recruit-
ment in hiring practices
●Leverage private investment for community revitalization, including philanthropic
●Expand access to community meetings, including addressing language barriers, meeting times
74 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Protecting Existing Residents from Displacement comprises strategies that protects residents in
areas of lower or moderate opportunity and concentrated poverty and preserves housing choices
and affordability. Examples include:
●First right of return to existing residents and policies that include moving expenses
●Multi-lingual tenant legal counseling
●Affirmative marketing strategies or plans targeting nearby neighborhoods, a Disadvantaged
Community or a Low-Income Community
●Replacement requirements in targeted growth areas such as transit stations, transit corridors,
job and housing rich areas, downtowns and revitalization areas or policies on sites identified to
accommodate the housing needs of lower income households
●Rent stabilization programs beyond what is required by California Civil Code 1946.2
●Just cause eviction or other efforts improving tenant stability beyond what is required by Califor-
nia Civil Code 1946.2
●Policies to preserve Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing or mobilehome parks
●Condominium conversion restrictions
●Land banking programs actively receiving funding
●Community benefit zoning and/or other land value recapture strategy
●Rent review board and/or mediation, foreclosure assistance, or multilingual tenant legal counsel-
ing services
●Density bonus ordinances that expand on state replacement requirements
●Implementation of an overlay zone to protect and assist small businesses
●Establishment of a small business advocate office and single point of contact for every small
business owner;
●Creation and maintenance of a small business alliance;
●Increased visibility of the jurisdiction’s small business assistance programs;
●Formal program to ensure that some fraction of a jurisdiction’s purchases of goods and services
come from local businesses
●Prioritization of Minority and Women Business Enterprises (MWBE) for public contracting
●Environmental contamination mitigation and hazard mitigation measures such as seismic retrofits,
flood adaptation measures, etc. to prevent displacement from disasters
●Eliminating crime-free or nuisance ordinances or programs that result in penalties to landlords
and evictions of tenants
California Department of Housing and Community Development 75
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Sample Tables
Regional Comparisons
Population by Race/Ethnicity
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
White (Non-Hispanic)
Hispanic/Latino
Black or African American
Native American
Asian
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
Other
Two or More Races
Population by Disability Type
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Total with a Disability
»Hearing Difficulty
»Vision Difficulty
»Cognitive Difficulty
»Ambulatory Difficulty
»Self-care Difficulty
»Independent Living
Source: XXXXXXXXX
76 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Housing Units by Type
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Single Family-Detached
Single Family-Attached
2-4 Units
5+ Units
Mobilehomes
Other
Source: XXXXXXXXX
Population by Familial Status
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Family Households
»Married-Couple Family Households
• With Children
• Without Children
»Other Family Households
• With Children
• Without Children
Non-family Households
Source: XXXXXXXXX
California Department of Housing and Community Development 77
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Households by Income
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Less than $10,000
$10,000-$14,999
$15,000-$24,999
$25,000-$34,999
$35,000-$49,999
$50,000-$74,999
$75,000-$99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000 or More
Median Income
Source: XXXXXXXXX
Households by Overpayment
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Owner Households (All Low Income
Levels 0-80% AMI)
Paying >30%
Paying >50%
Renter Households (All Low Income
Levels 0-80% AMI)
Paying >30%
Paying >50%
Owner Households (Extremely Low
Income Levels 0-30% AMI)
Paying >30%
Paying >50%
Renter Households (Extremely Low
Income Levels 0-30% AMI)
Paying >30%
Paying >50%
Source: XXXXXXXXX
78 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Households by Tenure
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Owner Households
Renter Households
Total Households
Source: XXXXXXXXX
Households by Overcrowding
City County Region/State
2010 2018 2010 2018 2010 2018
Owner Households
»1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room
»1.51 to 2.00 occupants per room
» 2.01 or more occupants per room
Renter Households
»1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room
»1.51 to 2.00 occupants per room
»2.01 or more occupants per room
Total Households
Source: XXXXXXXXX
California Department of Housing and Community Development 79
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
List of Fair Housing Assistance Organizations
Name Service Area Address Phone Website
California
Department of Fair
Employment and
Housing
California 2218 Kausen Dr. Ste.
100
Elk Grove, CA 95758
916-478-7251 https://www.dfeh.
ca.gov/
Greater Bakersfield
Legal Assistance, Inc.
Kern County, CA 615 California Ave.
Bakersfield, CA 93304
661-325-5943 http://www.gbla.org/
Fair Housing Council
of Central California
Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras,
Colusa, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn,
Inyo, Kern, Kings, Lassen, Madera,
Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Mono,
Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramen-
to, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo,
Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Stanislaus,
Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare,
Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba
333 W. Shaw Ave. Ste.
14 Fresno, CA 93704
559-244-2950 http://www.fhc-cc.
org/index.html
Mental Health
Advocacy
Services, Inc.
Los Angeles area 3255 Wilshire Blvd.
Ste. 902 Los Angeles,
CA 90010
213-389-2077 http://mhas-la.org/
Southern California
Housing Rights
Center
The City of Los Angeles, Los
Angeles County, Antelope Valley, &
Ventura County
3255 Wilshire Blvd.
1150 Los Angeles, CA
90010
213-387-8400 http://www.hrc-la.org/
default.asp?id=6
Housing and Econom-
ic Rights Advocates
State of California 1814 Franklin St. Ste.
1040 Oakland, CA
94612
510-271-8443 http://www.heraca.
org/
Bay Area Legal Aid San Rafael, Napa, Richmond,
Oakland, San Francisco, Redwood
City, & San Jose
1735 Telegraph Ave.
Oakland, CA 94612
510-663-4755 https://baylegal.org/
80 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Bibliography
AFFH Rule and Assessments
Assembly Bill 686
California State Legislature. September 30, 2018 Bill text for California’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing law. HCD AB 686 Summary of Requirements in Housing Element Law Memorandum
(April 2020)
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: California’s New Law (PDF)
National Housing Law Project. 2019. 2 pp.
Summarizes Assembly Bill 686, California’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Law.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Final Rule (PDF)
Federal Register. 2015. 101 pp.
AFFH Rule Guidebook (PDF)
U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2015. 222 pp.
California Department of Housing and Community Development Final 2020 Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (PDF)
Executive Summary. June 2020. 10 pp.
California Department of Housing and Community Development Final 2020 Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing Choice – Final AI 425 Chapter 13: Impediments to Fair Housing
Choice (PDF)
June 2020. 9 pp.
Furthering Fair Housing
National Fair Housing Alliance
Summarizes the Obama administration’s AFFH Rule and provides update on the rule change.
Furthering Fair Housing
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning. This website
provides a clearinghouse of assessments of fair housing completed during the implementation of
the HUD AFFH Rule, sample goals, and articles detailing research on implementation of the HUD
AFFH Rule and related topics.
Policy Objective: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Local Housing Solutions.
This web article provides suggestions for improving access to opportunity through place-based
strategies, mobility strategies (including inclusionary zoning), and specific policies detailed in a
housing policy toolkit.
National Housing Law Project (NHLP)
These resources provide context regarding the Obama administration’s implementation of the 2015
federal AFFH rule.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 81
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
●AFFH Implementation: An Update for Advocates (PDF) 2016.
●AFFH Glossary (PDF) 2016.
●Assessment of Fair Housing Advocate Participation Checklist (PDF) 2016.
Assessment of Fair Housing Plan (PDF)
City of Los Angeles & The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.
Prepared by Enterprise Community Partners and the Lawyers Committee. Nov. 6, 2017. 434 pp.
NLIHC: Assessment Tools
National Low-Income Housing Coalition.
NLIHC makes available assessment tools from the Obama administration’s AFFH rule. Included are
Assessment Tools for Localities and PHAs as well as a Proposed Assessment Tool for States.
PRRAC: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Poverty & Race Research Action Council (PRRAC) provides multiple samples and tools for conduct-
ing an Analysis of Impediments/Assessment to Fair Housing Choice. Also includes background
information on AFFH plus comment letters and news stories regarding the termination of the rule.
Preserving Community and Neighborhood Choice (PDF)
HUD. 2020. 57 pp.
This presents HUD’s new rule, which replaces the 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule,
terminated by HUD in 2020.
Federal Guidance
Joint Statement of HUD and DOJ on State and Local Land Use Laws and Practices and the
Application of the Fair Housing Act (PDF)
U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ). November 10, 2016. 20pp.
Office of General Counsel Guidance on Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Use
of Criminal Records by Providers of Housing and Real Estate-Related Transactions (PDF)
HUD. April 4, 2016. 10 pp.
Joint Statement of HUD and DOJ on Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing
Act (PDF)
HUD. May 17, 2004. 15 pp.
Fair Housing Enforcement – Occupancy Standards; Notice of Statement of Policy (PDF)
Federal Register. December 22, 1998. 7 pp.
Office of General Counsel Guidance on Fair Housing Act Protections for Persons with Limited
English Proficiency (PDF)
HUD. September 15, 2016. 9 pp.
The guidance clarifies that discrimination against people in housing transactions based on the
language they speak can be considered discrimination under the Fair Housing Act.
82 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Equal Access in Accordance with an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and
Development Programs; Final Rule
Federal Register. September 21, 2016.
Equal Access to Housing in HUD Programs Regardless of Sexual Orientation or Gender
Identity; Final Rule
Federal Register. February 3, 2012.
Olmstead: Community Integration for Everyone
DOJ, Civil Rights Division. Information and Technical Assistance on the Americans with Disabilities
Act
This is an overview of the 1999 Supreme Court decision regarding Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. The decision requires states to place qualified people with mental disabilities in
community settings rather than institutional ones.
Joint Statement of HUD and DOJ on Reasonable Modifications Under the Fair Housing Act
(PDF)
HUD. March 5, 2008. 18 pp.
Joint Letter to Local Colleagues (PDF)
U.S. Departments of Education; Transportation; and Housing and Urban Development. June 3,
2016. 3 pp.
This joint letter calls on “local education, transportation, and housing leaders to work together on
issues at the intersection of our respective missions in helping to guarantee full access to opportu-
nity across the country.” It lays out the original vision of the AFFH rule as being one of coordination
among agencies that provide access to opportunity.
Data & Maps
CalEnviroScreen
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
This mapping tool helps identify California communities that are most affected by several sources
of pollution.
California Health Interview Survey
University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Health Policy Research.
“The California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) is the nation's largest state health survey and a
critical source of data on Californians as well as on the state's various racial and ethnic groups.”
California Healthy Places Index
This site maps by zip code the following conditions: economic, education, housing, healthcare
access, neighborhood, and clean environment.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 83
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
California Neighborhood Change Maps
Urban Displacement Project. Text, data, and color-coded maps.
●Mapping Displacement, Gentrification, and Exclusion in the San Francisco Bay Area Updated in
2018.
●Mapping Neighborhood Change in Southern California: Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego
Counties Updated in 2020 with new layers reflecting COVID-19 vulnerabilities.
Data and Tools for Fair Housing Planning
Urban Institute. July 2020.
Provides downloadable files of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing data and guidelines pertaining
to the 2015 rule, thus offering assistance for states still pursuing these goals.
Mapping Inequality: Redlining in New Deal America
University of Richmond Digital Scholarship Lab.
Provides historic Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) maps that were color coded to reflect the
mortgage security potential of various neighborhoods. These maps and their coding provided a
tool for redlining that made it difficult or impossible for people in certain areas to access mortgage
financing to become homeowners. The maps “allow and encourage you to grapple with this history
of government policies contributing to inequality.”
National Equity Atlas
“America's most detailed report card on racial and economic equity. We equip movement leaders
and policymakers with actionable data and strategies to advance racial equity and shared prosperity.”
Opportunity Insights: The Economic Tracker
Harvard University.
Data, research, and policy recommendations. “Our mission is to identify barriers to economic
opportunity and develop scalable solutions that will empower people throughout the United States
to rise out of poverty and achieve better life outcomes.” This data is currently focused on the
economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps - California
HCD, Treasurer of the State of California | California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, and The
Institute of Othering and Belonging, U.C. Berkeley.
PolicyMap
PolicyLink. 2017.
Uses 2010 Census to map a variety of measurements, including demographics, income, and housing.
Race Counts
Race Counts measures the overall performance, amount of racial disparity, and impact by popula-
tion size of counties and cities in California.
Urban Displacement Project
Articles, reports, and policy briefs; gentrification and displacement maps of several metropolitan
areas; UCLA and UC Berkeley case studies of Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay Area neighbor-
hoods.
84 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Using Data to Assess Fair Housing and Improve Access to Opportunity: A Guidebook for
Community Organizations (PDF)
L. Hendey & M. Cohen. Urban Institute. 2017. 64 pp.
Videos
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing in California: Prioritizing Fair Housing Goals in Planning
for the State’s Housing Needs
(Opens to page with embedded recording of Webinar. Run time: 1 hour 27 min.)
Terner Center for Housing Innovation, U.C. Berkeley. 2020.
Webinar panel discussion featuring Gillian Adams, Arthur Gailes, and Annelise Osterberg, moder-
ated by Terner Center Managing Director Ben Metcalf, with opening remarks by HCD’s Director,
Gustavo Velasquez.
Segregated by Design
M. Lopez, Director. Silkwood Studios. 2019. Run time: 17 min. 42 sec.
This animated video, narrated by Richard Rothstein, “examines the forgotten history of how our
federal, state and local governments unconstitutionally segregated every major metropolitan area
in America through law and policy.”
Books
The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America
R. Rothstein. New York: Liveright Publishing Corp., 2017. 345 pp.
Examines the historical segregation of housing due to governmental policies and real estate and
mortgage industry practices. Analyzes the impact this has on neighborhoods today regarding
environmental justice and access to quality schools, public transportation, jobs, parks, and other
opportunities.
The One-way Street of Integration: Fair Housing and the Pursuit of Racial Justice in American
Cities.
E.G. Goetz. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2018. 228 pp.
From the bookseller’s website: “Goetz traces the tensions involved in housing integration and
policy to show why he doesn't see the solution to racial injustice as the government moving poor
and nonwhite people out of their communities.”
Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermined Black Homeownership
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2019. 368 pp.
From the publisher’s website: “Race for Profit uncovers how exploitative real estate practices
continued well after housing discrimination was banned. The same racist structures and individuals
remained intact after redlining’s end, and close relationships between regulators and the industry
created incentives to ignore improprieties.”
California Department of Housing and Community Development 85
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Segregation by Design: Local Politics and Inequality in American Cities
J. Trounstine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. 277 pp.
From the publisher’s website: “Segregation by Design draws on more than 100 years of quantitative
and qualitative data from thousands of American cities to explore how local governments generate
race and class segregation.”
Research Articles & Reports
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: A Reckoning with Government-Sponsored Segregation
in the 21st Century
(Links to page with free PDF download.)
S. Menendian. National Civic Review 106(3): 20-27. 2017.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing for People with Disabilities: Recommendations and
Best Practices for Municipalities (PDF)
A. Ballard. Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago. n.d.
This 18-slide presentation defines barriers to housing for people with disabilities and provides
solutions.
“Affirmatively Further Fair Housing: California’s Response to a Changing Federal Landscape”
R. Williams. Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development Law 28(3): 387-396. 2019.
America’s Formerly Redlined Neighborhoods Have Changed, and So Must Solutions to
Rectify Them
(Links to page with button for free PDF download.)
A.M. Perry & D. Harshbarger. Brookings. 2019. 20 pp.
The population currently living in what were once HOLC “redlined” neighborhoods is majority-BI-
POC but not majority-Black, and, contrary to conventional perceptions, Black residents also do not
form a plurality in these areas overall.
Antisubordination Planning
(Links to page with full-text download.)
J. Steil. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 2018.
“Beyond People Versus Place: A Place-Conscious Framework for Investing in Housing and
Neighborhoods”
M.A. Turner. Housing Policy Debate 27(2), 306-314. 2017.
This paper offers five principles for ongoing experimentation and knowledge building: (a) develop
citywide strategies that promote both inclusion and redevelopment; (b) anticipate and plan for
residential mobility and neighborhood change; (c) connect residents of poor neighborhoods to city
and regional opportunities; (d) capitalize on the coming rental housing boom; and (e) use data for
continuous learning and accountability.
86 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Building a National Narrative of Anti-Displacement Strategies: Key Takeaways From SPARC-
CC Regions
Cash, Anna, et al. Urban Displacement Project. University of California, Berkeley.
This article reviews recent gentrification and displacement literature, outlines the need for a broader
neighborhood change narrative that acknowledges the role of cultural and political displacement
as well as neighborhood decline in perpetuating diverse impacts in vulnerable communities. The
article presents cross-site themes that emerged during site visits in dialogue with recent literature
and policy initiatives focused on investment and disinvestment driven displacement, race and
displacement, access to resources in communities receiving displaced residents, and the impact
of climate change on neighborhoods. Finally, the article draws upon lessons from the sites to offer
a national narrative of anti-displacement approaches for action across local, regional, state, and
national levels.
Creating Moves to Opportunity: Experimental Evidence on Barriers to Neighborhood Choice
(PDF)
P. Bergman, R. Chetty, S. DeLuca, N. Hendren, L. F. Katz, & C. Palmer. 2020. 97 pp.
The authors conclude that redesigning affordable housing policies to provide customized as-
sistance in a housing search could reduce residential segregation and increase upward mobility
substantially.
Developing Opportunity: Innovative Models for Strategic Housing Acquisition (PDF)
P. Kye, M. Mouton & M. Haberle. Poverty & Race Research Action Council. 2018. 26 pp.
New initiatives provide pathways to mobility and create affordable housing by acquiring existing
market-rate housing in areas of high opportunity. Authors detail programs and provide examples
from Baltimore, Dallas, Chicago, and King County, Washington.
Disparate Impact and an Antisubordination Approach to Civil Rights and Urban Policy (PDF)
J. Steil. Poverty & Race 28(2). 2019.
The Effects of the 1930s HOLC "Redlining" Maps
D. Aaronson, D. Hartley & B. Mazumder. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. 2020. 100 pp.
This working paper, begun in 2017 and revised in 2020, examines “the effects of the 1930s-era
HOLC ‘redlining’ maps on the long-run trajectories of neighborhoods.”
Fair Housing in Jeopardy: Trump Administration Undermines Critical Tools for Achieving
Racial Equity (PDF)
National Fair Housing Alliance. 2020. 87 pp.
Annual Fair Housing Trends report.
Forced Relocation and Residential Instability Among Urban Renters.
Desmond, M., Gershenson, C., & B. Kiviat. Social Science Review 89(2). 237-262. 2015.
From the abstract: This article reveals mechanisms of residential mobility among low-income
renters, identifies previously undocumented consequences of forced displacement, and develops a
more comprehensive model of residential instability and urban inequality.
California Department of Housing and Community Development 87
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
The Geography of Inequality: How Land Use Regulation Produces Segregation (PDF)
J. Trounstine. American Political Science Review 114(2): 443-455. 2020.
From the abstract: “I provide evidence that more stringent land use regulations are supported by
whiter communities and that they preserve racial homogeneity.”
Home Equity: A Vision of Housing Security, Health and Opportunity (PDF)
Colorado Health Institute. 2019. 56 pp.
This paper explores the interdependence of health outcomes; healthful, quality housing; and access
to better schools, jobs, and other opportunities. It offers multiple strategies for change.
HUD’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule: A Contribution and Challenge to Equity
Planning for Mixed Income Communities (PDF)
K.M. O’Regan & K. Zimmerman. Case Western Reserve University. 2020. 23 pp.
From the abstract: “This essay explains the framework and theory behind the rule, and how a rule
aimed at overcoming racial segregation can support the creation and preservation of mixed-income
communities. …We conclude with a discussion of implications for action (or at least attention) with
respect to the rule, particularly with respect to mixed-income strategies.”
Making Every Neighborhood a Place of Opportunity: 2018 Fair Housing Trends Report (PDF)
Shanti Abdein et al. National Fair Housing Alliance. 2018. 100 pp.
From the abstract: “If everyone had access to affordable housing, fair credit, a good school, healthy
food, a decent job, green space, and quality health care, how would our nation and our economy
look then? How do we ensure that future generations of all backgrounds live in neighborhoods rich
with opportunity? Fair housing.”
Neighborhoods for All: Expanding Housing Opportunity in Seattle’s Single-Family Zones
(PDF)
City of Seattle, Planning Commission. 2018. 52 pp.
This white paper presents Seattle’s strategies for increasing access to affordable housing, transpor-
tation, and jobs for those living outside of the urban core.
A Place-Conscious Approach Can Strengthen Integrated Strategies in Poor Neighborhoods
M.A. Turner. Brookings. 2015. 7 pp.
This short article is the forerunner of Turner’s Housing Policy Debate piece, above.
Place and Opportunity: Using Federal Fair Housing Data to Examine Opportunity across US
Regions and Populations (PDF)
R. Gourevitch, S. Greene, and R. Pendall. Urban Institute. 2018. 24 pp.
This research brief highlights new connections between place and access to opportunity across
regions and populations. The authors analyze data on neighborhood-level exposure to opportunity
that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development originally released in 2015 to help
local communities reduce segregation and comply with the Fair Housing Act.
Pricing Roads, Advancing Equity (PDF)
TransForm. 2019. 64 pp.
Fair housing and access to opportunity are advanced when efficient, affordable transportation is
available.
88 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Promoting Opportunity through Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (eTOD): Navigating
Federal Transportation Policy (PDF)
A. Abu-Khalaf. Enterprise Community Partners. 2018. 28 pp.
This report provides stakeholders involved in achieving eTOD guidance on understanding and
benefitting from federal transportation policies and programs.
Promoting Opportunity through Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (eTOD): Barriers to
Success and Best Practices for Implementation
(Links to page where full-text article is available via the Open Resource button.)
M. Spotts. Enterprise Community Partners. 2015. 74 pp.
This report demonstrates that numerous barriers inhibit low- and moderate-income families’ ability
to find housing in communities with access to robust, multi-modal transportation options. The
report also makes recommendations for overcoming those barriers and highlights numerous best
practices from regions across the U.S.
Promoting Opportunity through Equitable Transit-Oriented Development (eTOD): Making
the Case
(Links to page where full-text article is available via the Open Resource button.)
J. Hersey & M. Spotts. Enterprise Community Partners. 2015. 21 pp.
Equitable transit-oriented development (eTOD) is one tool to ensure that high-opportunity neigh-
borhoods are inclusive despite the property value increases that often result from such investments.
Racial Disparities in Home Appreciation: Implications of the Racially Segmented Housing
Market for African Americans’ Equity Building and the Enforcement of Fair Housing Policies
M. Zonta. Center for American Progress. 2019. 39 pp.
“Segregation and racial disparities in home appreciation put African Americans at a disadvantage in
their ability to build equity and accumulate wealth.”
Removing Barriers to Accessing High-Productivity Places (PDF)
D. Shoag. The Hamilton Project: Policy Proposal 2019-02. 2019. 30 pp.
Workers without a college education are moving away from the places that offer them the highest
wages and their children the best later-life outcomes. The author offers strategies that policymakers
at various levels of government can use to combat this relatively new problem, including case
studies of cities that have successfully expanded access at the local level.
Segregation and Neighborhood Health
J. Richardson et al. NCRC. 2020. 50 pp.
“This report examined [historically] redlined areas and how they are associated with adverse public
health outcomes for a range of diseases and conditions that make people particularly susceptible to
the worst effects of COVID-19.”
California Department of Housing and Community Development 89
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Supply Skepticism: Housing Supply and Affordability
Been, V., Ingrid, E., & K. O’Regan. Housing Policy Debate 29(1), 25-40. 2019.
From the abstract: “Growing numbers of affordable housing advocates and community members
are questioning the premise that increasing the supply of market-rate housing will result in housing
that is more affordable. This article is meant to bridge the divide, addressing each of the key
arguments supply skeptics make and reviewing what research has shown about housing supply and
its effect on affordability.”
“Survival of the Fairest: Examining HUD Reviews of Assessments of Fair Housing”
J.P. Steil & N. Kelly. Housing Policy Debate 29(5), 736-751. 2019.
From the abstract: “Our analysis shows that HUD engaged in detailed reviews of municipalities’
Assessments of Fair Housing and provided constructive feedback. The most common issues with
which municipalities struggled were setting realistic goals that would actually advance fair housing
and creating measurable metrics and milestones to gauge progress.”
What Would It Take to Ensure Quality, Affordable Housing for All in Communities of Oppor-
tunity? (PDF)
M.A. Turner, S. Greene, C. P. Scally, K. Reynolds & J. Choi. Urban Institute. 2019. 40 pp.
If everyone could afford quality housing, and every neighborhood offered a diversity of housing
options, people up and down the income ladder could enjoy housing security and build wealth
through homeownership. Achieving this calls for bold action at all levels of government and in the
private and nonprofit sectors.
This page intentionally left blank.
90 California Department of Housing and Community Development
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Housing & Community Development
2020 W. El Camino Avenue | Sacramento, CA 95833
Phone: 916-743-2244
State Housing and Community Development Department | Housing Policy Division
