Cotati City Council
Agenda Staff Report
Item type: REGULAR AGENDA (ACTION)
To: City Council
Subject: DISCUSS CAL CITIES REQUEST FOR LETTERS OPPOSING SB 634 (PEREZ), AB 647 (GONZALES) AND SUPPORTING AB
650 (PAPAN)
Date: April 22, 2025
Written by: Damien O'Bid, City Manager
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council review the Cal Cities requests for support and opposition to three items of pending State legislation and if supportive of the Cal Cities position, adopt a motion authorizing the Mayor to sign and transmit the three attached letters.
Background
The City of Cotati is a member of the League of California Cities (Cal Cities), as are most cities in California. Cal Cities supports education of member cities and also supports advocacy at the State Legislature, particularly on issues of local control and unfunded state mandates.
In cases of urgent matters, the City Council Rules allow the Mayor to sign legislative position letters from Cal Cities. However, if there is sufficient time, Cal City requests are to come to the full City Council for consideration.
Analysis/Discussion
The City recently received two requests from Cal Cities, one to support AB 650 and another to oppose SB 634. The summary provided by Cal Cities is below, with the template letters attached.
Assembly Bill (SB) 650: Housing Element: Regional Housing Needs Allocation (Support) What the bill does: AB 650 would allow local governments to begin the housing element update process six months early, provide greater certainty and reduce ambiguity in the housing element review process, and ensure that local governments have adequate time to respond to the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) review letters.
Why this is important to Cal Cities members: AB 650 would help ensure that local jurisdictions have the necessary resources, feedback, and time to site and plan for housing within their jurisdiction, as required by state law. Specifically, AB 650 would:
• Allow local jurisdictions to begin the housing element update process six months early. • Require HCD to provide specific text and analysis that must be included in the housing element to remedy identified deficiencies.
• Ensure that local jurisdictions are not penalized when HCD identifies additional deficiencies not previously identified in prior review letters.
Senate Bill (SB) 634: Homelessness: Civil and Criminal Penalties. (Oppose) What the Bill Does: SB 634 severely limits cities' ability to respond to the growing homelessness crisis in communities across California by prohibiting local governments from adopting any regulation, policy, or guidance that imposes civil or criminal penalties on a person experiencing homelessness.
Why this is Important to Cal Cities Members: Cities are implementing balanced approaches that protect both the rights of individuals experiencing homelessness and the broader community’s needs for clean, safe, and accessible public spaces. Cities recognize the importance of connecting unhoused residents to housing and services, but without the ability to use civil or criminal enforcement remedies, cities have no meaningful way to respond to urgent health and safety concerns and protect public spaces.
Additional Background:
Local jurisdictions are already working within an evolving legal landscape, including recent federal court decisions like Johnson v. Grants Pass, which clarified constitutional limits on how cities can address homelessness through enforcement actions. SB 634 directly undermines this decision by stripping local governments of the authority to tailor enforcement strategies to their unique circumstances.
SB 634 directly contradicts cities’ efforts to address encampments and the Governor’s November 2024 executive order directing state departments and agencies to adopt policies to address homeless encampments on state properties. The executive order also encouraged local governments to adopt similar policies or risk losing access to state homelessness funding.
Assembly Bill (AB) 647: Housing Development Approvals: Residential Units (Oppose) What the Bill Does: Forces cities to allow up to eight housing units — only one of which is required to be affordable — on lots with an existing single-family home or in an area zoned for eight units or less, without any environmental review or public input.
Why this is Important to Cal Cities Members: AB 647 would empower developers to bulldoze nearly any home and replace it with eight new units. Once those units are constructed, Government Code Section 66323(a)(4) requires local jurisdictions to allow up to an additional eight ADUs on the same lot, bringing the total allowable units to sixteen, while simultaneously ignoring existing height limits, density requirements, and parking standards.
Additional Background:
AB 647 fails to recognize the extensive public engagement and costs associated with developing and adopting zoning ordinances and state-mandated housing elements that are certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
Every eight years, cities are required to spend tens of thousands of dollars on state-mandated housing plans. AB 647 is the latest attempt from the Legislature to disregard those plans and replace them with one-size-fits-all zoning mandates. These general fund dollars could be spent on parks, infrastructure, and other critical services.
Financial Considerations
There are no direct impacts from transmitting these letters to the State. If the legislation passes or fails to become law, there may be related currently unknown financial impacts.
Environmental Issues
Where it can be determined with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA review.
This general rule can be applied to activities which could be subject to the CEQA process, but which logic dictates should not be subject to CEQA review. Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed resolution is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 14.03.021 of the CEQA Guidelines in that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant impact on the environment.