AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• A jurisdiction must contract with one or more organizations to provide foreclosure assistance to homeowners earning up to 120% of AMI.
• Foreclosure assistance activities may include tax delinquency forgiveness, emergency direct financial assistance (loans, grants, or other investment), loan modification services, legal services, foreclosure counseling, and proactive, targeted outreach to eligible households.
• The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the foreclosure assistance providers who are funded to assist residents.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has contracted or will contract with one or more foreclosure assistance organizations.
• A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about foreclosure assistance for residents.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period.
MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.
Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income42 households.
Purpose
42 In some contexts, state and federal agencies use the term “low-income” to refer to the more specific category of households earning between 50% of AMI and 80% of AMI. However, the use of the term “low- income households” in MTC Resolution No. 4530 is assumed to be synonymous with the broader category of “lower-income,” or all households below 80% of AMI. 567
Health emergencies, job loss, or other unexpected expenses disproportionately impact lower-income households, and force renters to choose between paying rent and covering other necessary life expenses. Most eviction filings result from unpaid rent totaling less than the cost of one month, according to research from Princeton University’s Eviction Lab.
43 For these reasons, rental assistance programs providing low- income tenants with emergency funds for rent are effective at preventing eviction and stopping displacement.44 In addition to one-time assistance to prevent eviction, some rental assistance programs provide short-term assistance (e.g., six months to one year) to help residents experiencing homelessness become rehoused and achieve stability.
Effective rental assistance programs provide one-time or short-term financial support to lower-income tenants at greatest risk of experiencing eviction and homelessness.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s tenant rental assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding 45 that provides ongoing
allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. o The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a rental assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on rental assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows rental assistance as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
43 Badger, Emily. (2019). Many Renters Who Fact Eviction Owe Less than $600. The New York Times. 44 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
45 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use of these funds for the program can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 568
• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a rental assistance funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
• Jurisdictions that have committed rental assistance funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for rental assistance during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).
AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• The program must define the situations in which a tenant receives rental assistance and set the eligibility criteria for who receives assistance. Assistance must serve lower-income tenants (with incomes at 80% AMI or less), and jurisdictions may decide to target specific income groups or populations deemed most at risk of displacement and/or homelessness. The jurisdiction may choose to include additional eligibility requirements, such as the type(s) of documentation required for a tenant to establish eligibility (e.g., signed self-attestation form, etc.). • Rental assistance can be distributed directly by the jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction can contract with nonprofits and/or community-based organizations to administer the funds.
• The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the rental assistance providers who are funded to assist residents.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has contracted or will contract with one or more rental assistance providers.
• A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about rental assistance available for residents.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period.
MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future 569
funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.
Protection Policy 6: Rent Stabilization
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases based upon a measure of inflation or other metric, with provisions exceeding those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu).
Purpose
Rent stabilization ordinances limit annual rent increases to protect tenants from displacement. Importantly, research finds that rent stabilization policies are effective in preventing displacement and promoting neighborhood stability, particularly when paired with condominium conversion restrictions and just cause eviction regulations. 46 By
decreasing renter housing cost burden over time, rent stabilization leaves tenants with more money to spend on essential needs and in the local economy. The increased stability and affordability created by rent stabilization also has positive consequences for mental and physical health as well as children’s educational outcomes.47 Though state law currently caps rent increases for some tenants, these protections expire in 2030 and allow rent increases beyond what many tenants can afford. 48 Moreover, in the absence
of local rent stabilization ordinances and local government infrastructure to enforce them, tenants may be unaware of their rights and how to utilize them. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted local rent stabilization ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for tenants. An effective rent stabilization ordinance will define a maximum annual rent increase and create mechanisms for local enforcement.
Relevant State Laws
AB 1482 (Tenant Protection Act of 2019) and SB 567 (2023) AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019) limits annual rent increases to no more than 5% plus the local Consumer Price Index (a measure of the inflation rate) or 10%, whichever is lower. This law currently has a sunset of January 1, 2030. SB 567 (2023) makes landlords who violate the Tenant Protection Act liable in civil court for damages
46 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
47 PolicyLink. “Rent Stabilization.”
48 Research shows that the 8% rent cap in place in San Jose from 1979 to 2016 had little impact on displacement, leading the city to lower its rent cap to 5% in 2016. Accordingly, the 10% cap allowed in state law may be similarly ineffective at preventing displacement. For more information see the findings in “Exploring The Effectiveness Of Tenant Protections In Silicon Valley” by the Urban Displacement Project at UC Berkeley.
570
and provides mechanisms for the Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel to enforce the law.
Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act
Local rent stabilization ordinances must adhere to the framework established in state law by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. This law establishes certain parameters for the policy features of local ordinances, such as prohibiting rent stabilization on single-family homes or buildings constructed after 1995, and allowing landlords to reset rents to market rate after a tenant leaves their unit (known as “vacancy decontrol”).
Local ordinances retain significant room for policy flexibility to respond to local circumstances but must meet Costa-Hawkins’s standards.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The ordinance must not have a sunset date.
• The ordinance must apply to multifamily rental housing with three or more units, while adhering to the parameters of the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. If the jurisdiction chooses, the ordinance may apply to additional housing types, such as duplexes.
o The ordinance may allow for exemptions for special housing types (e.g., deed-restricted affordable housing, student housing, assisted living facilities). • A rent stabilization ordinance must limit maximum annual rent increases to be less than those allowed under state law (see Relevant State Laws section above for more information).
49 • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby tenants can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.
50 Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases, if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance.
49 The maximum annual rent increases allowed under state law are defined in California Civil Code Section 1947.12,
50 While state law provides some mechanisms for enforcement by the Attorney General and/or city attorney if a landlord raises rent in excess of the legally allowed increase, local administrative bodies like rent boards can provide more easily accessible processes for tenants to dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.
571
Protection Policy 7: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti- displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.
Purpose
Substandard conditions and physical deterioration represent a key threat to the region’s rental housing stock and unsubsidized affordable housing units. These conditions create health and safety risks for tenants and can lead to condemnation, abandonment, and/or demolition of housing units. The remediation of substandard conditions in unsubsidized affordable housing is not only necessary to preserve this housing but also represents an important anti-displacement strategy. Code enforcement programs need to ensure habitability issues and needs for substantial property repairs do not lead to the permanent displacement of tenants, which also requires maintaining housing stability for tenants during any temporary displacement necessary for repairs. Code enforcement and other programs to address substandard conditions need to be centered in an anti-displacement framework, otherwise these activities can lead to the immediate displacement of vulnerable tenants if properties are deemed uninhabitable.
An effective program which prevents displacement due to code enforcement protects tenants from displacement when renovations are mandated by code enforcement actions by requiring plans for maintaining habitability and providing public support to landlords on the condition that they provide additional tenant protections.
Relevant State Law
California Health and Safety Code (HSC)
HSC Section 17920.3 provides a definition of a substandard building, which includes inadequate sanitation such as a lack of plumbing, ventilation, or heating; structural hazards such as deteriorated floors, walls, or ceilings; faulty weather protection such as defective waterproofing and windows; and so on. Section 17970 – 17972 requires that when a jurisdiction receives a complaint from a tenant, they must inspect the building, document any findings, prescribe a remedy to the property owner, and schedule a reinspection to verify the correction. Section 17980 – 17992 states that once a building is determined to be substandard, the enforcement agency of the jurisdiction cannot require the vacating of residents unless it concurrently requires expeditious demolition or repair to comply with state law. If the tenant cannot safely reside in their unit due to repair, state law requires a property owner to provide affected tenants with compensation for moving expenses; the value of property lost, stolen or damaged in the process of moving; and costs associated with connection charges imposed by utility 572
companies for starting service. The relocation benefit also includes two months of the established fair market rent for the area as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the property owner must return the full security deposit to the tenant.
Requirements for TOC Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a policy to prevent displacement from substandard conditions that meets the minimum standards for at least ONE of the following options:
1. Offer grants or interest-free loans to landlords to repair substandard or other dangerous/inadequate conditions in exchange for anti-displacement protections for tenants.
o Funding for the program can come from any source that allows repairs of residential units as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals. o Prior to making repairs, the property owner must complete a tenant habitability plan describing how they will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing. o As a condition of receiving the grant or loan, the property owner must agree to continue renting to the existing tenant after repairs are complete with reasonable limits on rent increases for that tenant.
o Jurisdictions may set income qualifications for landlords to receive this funding.
2. Implement a rental escrow program where tenants experiencing persistent habitability issues receive rent reductions and rental payments are deposited into an escrow account until code violations are addressed.
o Prior to making repairs, the property owner must complete a tenant habitability plan describing how they will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing. o The tenant has the right to reoccupy the unit after repairs are complete. 573
o While rental funds are in escrow, the landlord can request access to them only for repairs, tenant relocation assistance, and other qualifying expenses. o The rental escrow program must clearly define the circumstances in which a tenant can safely withhold or reduce rent without fear of eviction.
3. Require landlords to complete a tenant habitability plan as part of the permitting process for repairs to address code issues.
o The plan must describe how the landlord will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. o If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing.
o The tenant has the right to reoccupy the unit after repairs are complete.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• The rehabilitation grant/loan program’s eligibility requirements and financing terms if a jurisdiction is selecting this option.
• A template of the tenant habitability plan or a document outlining details that must be included in such a plan if a jurisdiction is selecting this option.
Protection Policy 8: Tenant Relocation Assistance
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that provides relocation assistance (financial and/or other services) to tenants displaced through no fault of their own, with assistance exceeding that required under state law.
Purpose
Relocation assistance can prevent undue burden and hardship for renters in the Bay Area’s high-cost housing market. The majority of Bay Area tenants are lower-income, making less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), while nearly one-quarter of the region’s renters are extremely low-income and make less than 30% of AMI.51 Consequently, most tenants are likely to require financial assistance to regain stability if they are displaced from their current housing due to demolition, code enforcement violations, no-fault or no-cause evictions, or other circumstances outside of their control.
An effective relocation assistance policy includes clear definitions of tenant eligibility and required minimum compensation from landlord.
51 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
574
Relevant State Laws
Multiple state laws govern situations that require property owners to provide tenants with relocation assistance, including the following:
• Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482)
• California Government Code Sections 7260-7277
• Housing Crisis Act of 2019, established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021)
• California Health and Safety Code Sections 17975-17975.10
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s relocation assistance policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Landlords must make relocation payments for all no-cause or no-fault evictions.52 • Jurisdictions can choose to limit assistance to lower-income tenants (those at 80% of AMI or less) or lower- and moderate-income tenants (those at 120% of AMI or less).
• The amount of relocation assistance must be equal to at least three months’ fair market rent, unless another law (e.g., local, state, federal) requires a higher minimum amount.
Protection Policy 9: Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases on mobile home residents based upon a measure of inflation or another metric.
Purpose
A mobile home rent stabilization policy can help protect the affordability and stability of mobile home communities. Mobile home parks are often a unique hybrid of rental housing and ownership housing: residents typically own their homes and rent the lots where the homes are located, which generally enables mobile homes to be purchased at much lower prices than other forms of homeownership. In some cases, a mobile home resident rents the actual mobile home, either from the mobile home owner or the mobile home park. Despite their name, mobile homes are rarely able to be moved off their lots, and so an unaffordable increase in lot rent could force the sale of the mobile home and displacement of the residents. In some communities, mobile home parks comprise a significant portion of unsubsidized affordable housing, and these neighborhoods are
52 No-fault evictions can occur for tenants covered by just cause eviction protections under state law (i.e., AB 1482) or local ordinances, and these no-fault circumstances are defined by the terms of these laws.
For tenants who are not covered by just cause eviction protections under state law or local ordinances, no-cause evictions occur when a landlord chooses not to renew an annual lease or provides a notice to terminate the tenancy that is not required to state a reason. 575
increasingly being acquired by speculative investors.53 Given these conditions, mobile home rent stabilization can promote longer-term community stability for mobile home residents and prevent displacement of lower-income residents who lack other housing options. An effective mobile home rent stabilization ordinance will include a limit on annual rent increases and processes for ensuring compliance with the policy.
Relevant State Law
SB 940 (2022)
While the Mobile Home Residency Law previously exempted “new construction” from local mobile home rent stabilization laws, SB 940 (2022) limits this exemption to 15 years. Additionally, SB 940 creates a distinction between mobile home parks and mobile home spaces. For individual mobile home spaces within an existing mobile home park, “new construction” is newly constructed spaces “initially rented” after January 1, 1990. For mobile home parks, “new construction” is defined as all spaces in a newly constructed mobile home park for which the permit to operate is first issued on or after January 1, 2023.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate there is at least one mobile home park (as defined by California’s Mobile Home Park Act) within the jurisdiction. Due to the heightened vulnerability of mobile home parks and the residents who occupy them, a jurisdiction with an adopted mobile home rent stabilization policy that applies to all mobile home parks may receive credit for this policy even if none of the parks are located within TOC areas. If none of the at-risk mobile home parks in a jurisdiction are located within a TOC area, then the jurisdiction must apply this policy jurisdiction-wide.
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• A mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must define maximum annual rent increases for both mobile home spaces (i.e., lot rent) and mobile homes as ONE of the following:
o A flat rate increase of up to 5%. A jurisdiction may choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase below 5%.
o A rate increase linked to the local CPI, which is a measure of inflation. A jurisdiction must set the maximum allowable rent increase no higher than 100% of CPI, or the jurisdiction could choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase at a smaller percentage of CPI.
53 Arnold, C., Benincasa, R., and Childs, M. 2021. How the government helps investors buy mobile home parks, raise rent and evict people. National Public Radio. 576
o Some combination of the two standards described above (e.g., a maximum annual rent increase limited to 60% of CPI or 5%, whichever is lower). • Some form of vacancy control within constitutional limits. • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby mobile home residents can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• Documentation of the presence of at least one mobile home park within the jurisdiction.
• Documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance.
Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy, program, or investments that support fair housing testing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement.
Purpose
Fair housing laws aim to ensure that people have equal access to housing regardless of their race, national origin, family status, religion, sex, disability, or other characteristics that are known as “protected classes.”54 Across the region, people of color, people with disabilities, and other protected classes are disproportionately represented in a number of indicators of housing need that put them at greater risk of displacement.55 Consistent enforcement of existing fair housing law is a critical strategy to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. Local jurisdictions can further fair housing by supporting fair housing organizations who conduct fair housing testing, investigate complaints, and assist with filing complaints with the state and/or federal agencies who can take administrative action. In response to fair housing complaints, fair housing organizations can also provide mediation between housing providers and complainants, or file lawsuits against those found to be in violation of the law.
54 The Fair Housing Act is a federal law passed in 1968 and amended several times thereafter that protects individuals from experiencing housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability. California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act expands on the protected classes defined by federal law by also prohibiting housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, genetic information, marital status, source of income, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status.
55 For more information on disparities in housing needs, see ABAG’s Housing Needs Data Packets. 577
Relevant State Laws
Fair Employment and Housing Act
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits those engaged in the housing business from discriminating against protected classes. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing is responsible for enforcing state fair housing laws, which includes investigating and settling fair housing complaints.
AB 686
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, established by AB 686 (2018), requires that local jurisdictions take meaningful actions that 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 compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement policy/program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding56 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. o The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a tenant legal assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on fair housing enforcement. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows fair housing enforcement as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
56 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use of these funds for the program can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 578
• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a fair housing enforcement funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
• Jurisdictions that have committed fair housing enforcement funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for legal assistance services during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).
AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• A jurisdiction must contract with one or more fair housing service providers to serve its constituents and provide fair housing enforcement. Alternatively, the jurisdiction can establish its own fair housing testing and enforcement program with staff who conduct fair housing testing on a regular basis, 57 investigate
complaints of discrimination, provide information to tenants and landlords, and refer cases to the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing. 58 • The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the fair housing services available to assist residents.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has contracted or will contract with one or more fair housing enforcement organizations, if applicable. • A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about fair housing services for residents.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting
57 In 2017, the City of Seattle conducted their own in-house civil rights testing program where housing tests were conducted by email, phone and in-person.
58 The City of Santa Barbara has a Fair Housing Enforcement Officer on staff who completes these actions.
579
compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.
Protection Policy 11: Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that grants tenants legal protection from unreasonable, abusive, or coercive landlord behavior.
Purpose
Despite existing state law prohibiting landlords from using threats or intimidation for the purpose of influencing tenants to vacate a unit, landlord harassment continues to be an issue of concern and driver of informal evictions in many communities across the Bay Area. State law lacks specific language defining harassing behavior, which can make violations difficult to prove in court. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted anti-harassment ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for vulnerable tenants. 59 Informal evictions through tenant harassment are a persistent problem for low-income, undocumented, and/or limited English-speaking residents because these populations are especially vulnerable to landlord actions.
60 Anti-harassment ordinances can reduce
such displacement pressures by clarifying what constitutes harassment and enabling affected tenants as well as jurisdictions to stop harassment. Anti-harassment policies can also support habitability improvements by reducing the risk of retaliation against tenants who report habitability issues to landlords, thereby improving the quality of housing. An effective tenant anti-harassment ordinance defines prohibited harassing behaviors and mechanisms for enforcement.
Relevant State Laws
California Civil Code Section 1940.2
State law prohibits a landlord from using “force, willful threats, or menacing conduct” to influence a tenant to vacate a dwelling. The law also prohibits a landlord from threatening to disclose information regarding the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant. Tenants are entitled to up to $2,000 per violation if they prevail in a civil action.
59 Mercury News article from June 15, 2022, reporting on tenant harassment in Concord and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. East Bay Times article from July 13, 2021, reporting on tenant harassment in Richmond and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. 60 Desmond, M. (2012) Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty. AJS: 118(1) 88- 133; Desmond, M. C. Gershenson, and B. Kiviat (2016) Forced Relocation and Residential Instability among Urban Renters. Social Service Review 89 (2). Greenberg, D. C. Gershenson and M. Desmond (2016) Discrimination in Evictions: Empirical Evidence and Legal Challenges. Harvard Civil Rights -Civil Liberties Law Review 51: 115-158.
580
California Civil Code Section 1942.5
State law prohibits a landlord from retaliating against a tenant for exercising their legal rights. Landlords who violate this prohibition are liable for actual damages, attorney’s fees, and punitive damages of up to $2,000 per retaliatory act.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s tenant anti-harassment policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The tenant anti-harassment policy must define harassing behaviors, which at minimum shall include behaviors prohibited by state law as well as the following:
o Any behavior to prevent tenant organizing. Landlords may not impinge tenants’ ability to engage in organizing activities regarding issues of common interest or concern to other tenants, including unreasonable restrictions on distributing literature to and/or meeting with other residents at properties owned by the same landlord.
o Refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant's lawful rent payment. o Requesting information or documentation relating to immigration or citizenship status, unless otherwise required by federal law. o Failing to perform repairs or maintenance or threatening to fail to perform repairs or maintenance required by contract or by state, county, or local housing, health, or safety laws.
• The policy must state that the city or county attorney as well as the impacted tenant may bring a civil action or request an injunction in response to harassment. • The policy must establish penalties for landlords found to be in violation, including fines, attorneys' fees, and punitive damages. The policy shall also define a violation of the ordinance as an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction proceeding.
• The policy must establish noticing requirements for landlords to provide each tenant with an information sheet outlining anti-harassment protections and any other tenant protections in the jurisdiction (e.g., rent stabilization, just cause, relocation assistance). The sheet must include links to the city website and at least one local tenant legal services organization.
IV. Commercial Stabilization Policy Options
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least one of the commercial stabilization policies listed below:
• Commercial Stabilization Policy 1: Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay Zone • Commercial Stabilization Policy 2: Small Business and Non-Profit Preference Policy
581
• Commercial Stabilization Policy 3: Small Business and Non-Profit Financial Assistance Program
• Commercial Stabilization Policy 4: Small Business Advocate Office
A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in TOC areas. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction- wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.
Commercial Stabilization Policy 1: Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Establish boundaries designated for an overlay, triggering a set of protections and benefits should development impact small businesses (including public markets) or community-serving non-profits.
Purpose
To prevent displacement caused by transit-oriented development, jurisdictions can protect existing small businesses and community-serving non-profits by affording protections and benefits beyond what is available jurisdiction-wide. A jurisdiction may select this policy to preserve the rich community of small businesses and non-profits located in areas that are subject to new development. An “overlay zone” is a district that superimposes additional regulations over existing zoning districts. 61 A successful
overlay zone offers benefits such as an operating subsidy, eviction protections, and relocation requirements.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit overlay policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for protections. • Offer at least one protection or benefit specific to the community and expected to prevent displacement.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit a copy of the policy’s eligibility criteria and description of protections and/or benefits provided, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
61 Planetizen Planopedia. “What is an Overlay District?” 582
Commercial Stabilization Policy 2: Small Business and Non-Profit Preference Policy
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Give priority and a right of first offer to local small businesses and/or community-serving non-profits when selecting a tenant for new market-rate commercial space.
Purpose
Transit-oriented development has the potential to displace existing small businesses and non-profits as new development may increase commercial rent costs. This policy would require that owners or managers of applicable commercial spaces provide a preference to small businesses and/or community-serving non-profits when selecting tenants by offering them the right of first offer. A jurisdiction would select this policy to protect their existing community of non-profits and small businesses from displacement.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit preference policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for preference. • Establish a preference policy that prioritizes small businesses and non-profits when selecting new tenants by offering them the right of first offer. Jurisdictions may apply such a policy on publicly-owned properties, as part of the entitlement process for a new development, as a condition of a small business support program, or in other applicable circumstances.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit a copy of the policy’s eligibility criteria and preference details, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
Commercial Stabilization Policy 3: Small Business and Non-Profit Financial Assistance Program
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated funding program for any impacted small business and community-serving non-profits.
Purpose
As jurisdictions promote transit-oriented development in their communities, they must also take steps to prevent displacement and gentrification in these areas. By providing direct financial assistance, jurisdictions can support small businesses and non-profits through any community-wide transition that comes with new transit-oriented development. Jurisdictions may choose this policy to protect their small businesses and community-serving non-profits that enrich the fabric of their community. 583
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit financial assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirement to quality for financial assistance. • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding62 that provides financial assistance to stabilize small businesses and non-profits located in the TOC areas. The jurisdiction could choose to offer this assistance to businesses and non-profits in additional areas as well.
• Provide technical assistance and up-to-date information online regarding funding opportunities and deadlines.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the eligibility criteria and program details if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period. MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.
Commercial Stabilization Policy 4: Small Business Advocate Office Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a single point of contact for small business owners and/or a small business alliance.
Purpose
A jurisdiction’s small business economy is bolstered by technical assistance, educational workshops, advertising and exposure, and the development of a network of neighboring businesses. These types of support could be offered by a jurisdiction or an
62 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use of these funds for the program can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 584
outside contractor and are best utilized when there is a single point of contact. A jurisdiction may choose this policy to commit to the resilience of their small business community.
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business advocate office policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Provide a single point of contact for small business owners to connect with a technical support resource. The single point of contact could be a jurisdictional staff member or an outside contractor. Outside contractors could be a staff member of the nearest Small Business Center (SBC) or Small Business Development Center (SBDC)
63 In the case of an outside contractor, the jurisdiction must have dedicated staff oversight.
Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the eligibility criteria and program details if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• If an outside contractor is used as the point of contact, a description of the jurisdiction’s approach for oversight of the contractor.
63 SBCs are part of the California Network of Small Business and Technical Assistance Centers, funded by CalOSBA, while SBDCs are part of a nationwide network funded by the U.S. Small Business Administration.
585
Appendix B: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier
Table 1 lists the jurisdictions in each funding tier and the jurisdiction’s required minimum four-year funding commitment for each policy selected that requires a funding commitment. Note: all Bay Area jurisdictions are listed, although not all jurisdictions have TOC areas.
For the policies in the Protection category, the required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four policies, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a rental assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on a single policy, such as rental assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
Table 1: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier
Jurisdiction
Very Low-
and Low-
Income
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Yountville 30 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Calistoga 50 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Ross 54 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Unincorporated
Napa 61 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Colma 69 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Belvedere 77 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Monte Sereno 83 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Sebastopol 86 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Cotati 94 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Portola Valley 115 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Unincorporated
Solano 130 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Cloverdale 141 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Woodside 142 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Atherton 148 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
St. Helena 163 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Dixon 175 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Pinole 190 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Los Altos Hills 197 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Fairfax 235 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Hillsborough 244 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
586
Jurisdiction
Very Low-
and Low-
Income
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Suisun City 255 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Piedmont 257 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
East Palo Alto 260 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Clayton 267 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
San Pablo 273 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
American Canyon 278 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Half Moon Bay 285 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Healdsburg 299 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Tiburon 303 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Sausalito 315 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Corte Madera 336 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Benicia 339 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
San Anselmo 398 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Mill Valley 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Morgan Hill 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Oakley 440 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Larkspur 459 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Albany 486 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Brisbane 500 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Moraga 501 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
El Cerrito 526 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Hercules 542 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Martinez 551 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Orinda 587 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Windsor 607 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Rohnert Park 629 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Brentwood 634 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Emeryville 710 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Saratoga 715 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Newark 732 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Belmont 769 C $3,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Petaluma 787 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Los Altos 789 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pittsburg 812 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Foster City 819 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Los Gatos 847 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pacifica 848 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pleasant Hill 892 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
587
Jurisdiction
Very Low-
and Low-
Income
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Novato 898 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Millbrae 906 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Lafayette 943 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Danville 1,028 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Gilroy 1,054 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Vallejo 1,059 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Vacaville 1,081 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
San Bruno 1,109 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Carlos 1,164 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Menlo Park 1,166 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Campbell 1,186 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Napa 1,214 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Antioch 1,248 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Fairfield 1,256 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
San Mateo 1279 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Santa Clara 1305 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Richmond 1,325 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Rafael 1,349 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Leandro 1,357 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Union City 1,358 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Burlingame 1,360 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
South San
Francisco 1,373 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Sonoma 1,608 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Hayward 1,692 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Dublin 1,710 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Marin 1734 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Redwood City 1,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Cupertino 1,880 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Santa Rosa 1,919 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Alameda 1,972 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Concord 2,036 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Livermore 2,075 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Daly City 2,105 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Alameda 2,239 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
588
Jurisdiction
Very Low-
and Low-
Income
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
San Ramon 1,359 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Palo Alto 2,452 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Walnut Creek 2,611 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Milpitas 2,655 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Pleasanton 2,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
San Mateo 2,800 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Contra Costa 3,266 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Berkeley 3,854 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Mountain View 4,370 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Santa Clara 4,525 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Sunnyvale 4,677 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Fremont 5,736 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Oakland 10,261 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000
San Jose 23,775 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000
San Francisco 32,881 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000
589
Overview of the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission’s
Transit Oriented Communities
(TOC) Policy
City Council Meeting
October 1, 2024
590
Background
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
o Planning, financing, coordinating transportation for
nine Bay Area counties
o 2021: MTC and ABAG Adopted Plan Bay Area 2050
30-yr Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable
Communities Strategy
o 2022: MTC Adopted the TOC Policy
Helps Implement Plan Bay Area 2050
“Voluntary”
591
TOC Policy Goals
1. Increase the overall housing supply by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit-rich areas.
2. In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for businesses and commercial development.
3. Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility (bike and ped) within and to/from transit-rich areas, located more than 1/2 mile from transit stops or stations; and
4. Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit-oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area.
592
Funding
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
Flexible funds to MTC for
investments in roads,
highways, transit, and bike
and pedestrian projects.
MTC distributes funds to
local agencies through
different Programs
MTC
One Bay Area Grant
(OBAG)
MTC Program to guide
distribution of FHWA funds
City of Dublin has received
$1.13 million in last 3
OBAG cycles
OBAG 4- Requires TOC
Compliance by 2026
Other Funding
Alameda County
Transportation
Commission
Comprehensive
Investment Plan (CIP) may
include TOC compliance
requirements in the future
593
Valley Link Rail Extension
o Funding for Valley Link
tied to TOC Policy
compliance
o MTC commitment letter
594
TOC Policy Overview - Station Areas
West Dublin
BART Station
Dublin / Pleasanton
BART Station
595
TOC Policy Overview – Transit Tier
• Transit Tier defines
required TOC policy
standards
• Dublin served by one
BART line (Blue line)
• TOC Policy Tier 3
596
TOC Policy Overview – 4 Elements
1. Density and Intensity Standards (Station Areas)
2. Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization
Policies (Citywide)
3. Parking Management (Station Areas)
4. Access and Circulation (Citywide)
597
TOC Policy Overview
• Requires further analysis of impacts by staff
• What constitutes compliance for MTC?
– Achieve 85% compliance to qualify.
– MTC TOC Policy does not define metrics for compliance. – MTC plans to provide technical assistance to help
jurisdictions develop policies and programs (end of 2024). – Compliance and flexibility with compliance to be
determined in 2025.
598
Density and Intensity Standards
TOC Standards Tier 3 TOC
Standard
West Dublin BART Station Area (DDSP) Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Area
(Transit Station)
Minimum Residential
Density (units/acre)
50 TOD 30 25.1
Retail 22
Village None
Maximum Residential
Density (units/acre)
75 TOD 85 None
Retail None
Village 15
Minimum Office Intensity
(FAR)
2.0 TOD None .25
Retail None
Village None
Maximum Office
Intensity (FAR)
4.0 TOD 2.5 .80
Retail 2.0 (Retail District)
2.5 (Retail Core)
Village 0.35
599
Affordable Housing & Commercial Stabilization
Citywide policies across the following four categories to demonstrate TOC Policy compliance:
o Production (minimum of 2 policies out of 7 policies)
o Preservation (minimum of 2 policies out of 8 policies) o Protection (minimum of 2 policies out of 11 policies) o Commercial Stabilization (minimum of 1 policy out of 4 policies)
600
Production
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 7 Policies)
Policy
No
TOC Policy Requirement Notes / Consideration
1 Inclusionary
Housing
15% of units for new
residential developments
be deed restricted for
low-income households
Existing Inclusionary Zoning
Ordinance qualifies. (HE Program B.4:
Inclusionary Zoning Regulations)
4 Public Land for
Affordable Housing
Reuse of Publicly owned
land for affordable and
mixed - income housing
City is working with Alameda County
Surplus Authority to provide
affordable housing at the Transit
Center Site. (HE Program B.16:
Publicly Owned Land)
601
Preservation
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations
Policy
No
TOC Policy Requirement Notes /Consideration
4 Condominium
Conversion
Restrictions
Units converted to condominiums be
replaced 1:1 with comparable rental
units unless purchased by current
long-term tenants or converted
permanently to affordable housing
with tenant protections
Condominium Ordinance
(DMC 8.54) to be updated to
include 1:1 replacement of
converted units, no funding
requirement / requires staff
time.
8 Preventing
Displacement
from
Substandard
Conditions and
Associated
Enforcement
Activities
Minimize risk of displacement caused
by substandard conditions, through
local code enforcement activities.
Minimum funding
commitment. Minor Home
Improvement Grant with
Alameda County provides up
to $5,000/yr per household.
City would need to increase
funding to $10,000/yr.
602
Protection
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations
Policy
No.
TOC Policy Notes
1 Just Cause Eviction Protection Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 3 Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $300,000 4 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $300,000 5 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $300,000 6 Rent Stabilization Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions
and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Cannot be used if using Preservation Policy 8.
8 Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
No Mobile Homes in Dublin
10 Fair Housing Enforcement Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 11 Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 603
Commercial Stabilization
(Minimum of 1 Policy out of 4 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations
Policy
No.
TOC Policy Requirement Notes / Consideration
4 Small Business
Advocate Office
Provide a single point of
contact for small business
owners/ alliance
City currently provides this service
through the Economic
Development Department
604
Parking Management
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations
TOC Policy – Tier 3
Policy Parking
Requirement
Existing Parking
Requirement -
West Dublin BART
Station Area (i.e.,
DDSP)
Existing Parking
Requirement -
Dublin/Pleasanton Bart
Station Area (i.e., Transit
Center)
Min. Residential
and Commercial
Parking
No Minimum No Minimum No Minimum (Per requirements
of AB 2097)
Max. Residential
Parking
1 Space per unit No Maximum No Maximum
Max.
Commercial
Office Parking
2.5 Spaces per 1,000
SF
None None
605
Access and Circulation
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations
TOC Requirement Notes / Considerations
Adopt a Complete Streets Policy Adopted Complete Streets Policy in 2012 (Reso No. 199-12) Prioritize Implementation of Active
Transportation Projects in Station
Areas
DDSP , PDA: Transit Center Dublin Crossing, PDA: T own Ctr.
CIP- Downtown: Grid Street Network and Golden Gate Dr.
Gap Analysis and Improvement
Program for Station Areas
LAVTA Long Range Transit Plan (March 2024)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Identify Mobility Hub Opportunities in
Station Areas
LAVTA Tri-Valley Hub Network Integration Study (2021)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Climate Action Plan
Local Roadway Safety Plan
606
Next Steps
• Prepare policies committed to through the
Housing Element
• Staff to return to City Council
– Discuss policy considerations
– Request budget adjustments for technical analysis
and consultant services
607
Questions
608