CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
MARCH 28, 2023
PRESENTATIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2024 MASTER
FEE SCHEDULE
ITEM #7
PH 23-015
1 March 2, 2023 | Homelessness-Housing Task Force
Amy Cole-Bloom, Management Analyst
Christina Morales, Housing Division Manager
Master Fee Schedule Amendment to
Update Rent Stabilization Annual Fees
2 Presentation Outline
Background
Rent Stabilization Legislation in Hayward
RRSO Implementation Accomplishments
RRSO Data
RRSO Fee Change Analysis
Recommendation & Next Steps
3 Background
This section provides an overview of feedback from the Homelessness- Housing Task Force.
4 The HHTF discussed the RRSO fee
increase on March 2, 2023
•Homeless-Housing Task Force provided a range of feedback • Desire for more information on the implementation and efficacy of the RRSO
• Concern that not increasing the fee would underfund the program and weaken the protections established by the RRSO
• Consensus across members that more information on implementation was needed
•Staff provide annual updates to the HHTF on RRSO in
September
5 Rent Stabilization in Hayward
This section provides an overview of the RRSO and other relevant local and state policy related to rent stabilization.
6 The RRSO stabilizes rents for Covered Rental
Units and provides tenant protections for
almost all units
Hayward’s Residential Rent Stabilization and Tenant Protection Ordinance (RRSO):
• Provides rent increase relief to tenants as allowed under State law • Establishes a mediation and arbitration program to enforce requirements and to reduce displacement
• Discourages harassment and retaliatory evictions
• Encourages investment in new residential rental property • Assures landlords receive a fair return on their property and sufficient rental income to cover operational costs
7 Approximately 54% of all rental units are
Covered Rental Units
•For Covered Rental Units, rent increases:
Can only be imposed once every 12 months
Can be no more than 5% of the existing monthly rent absent other justifications allowable under the RRSO.
Are subject to the RRSO’s rent dispute resolution process if they exceed 5%, meaning that tenants can petition a rent increase more than 5% to initiate a review of the increase
•There are additional circumstances in which higher rent increases for covered units are allowed
8 State law provides some additional protections
to renters in Hayward not covered by the RRSO
•The Tenant Protection Act (AB 1482) creates a rent cap of no more than 5% + local CPI or 10%, whichever is lower
•AB 1482 covers almost all rental units except:
• Units constructed in the last 15 years, on a rolling basis • Units otherwise regulated to be affordable
• A two-unit property if the second unit is owner-occupied • Single-family homes not owned by a real estate trust, corporation, or LLC
•The RRSO includes just cause protections that supersede state law
9 The MRSO stabilizes rents and provides
protections for mobilehome space renters
Hayward’s MobilehomeSpace Rent Stabilization Ordinance
(MRSO):
• Establishes a space rent increase limit for mobile home park residents without long-term leases
• Provides a mediation and arbitration program to enforce requirements and to reduce displacement
• Prevents retaliatory evictions
• Has maintained consistent levels of service since 2019, so the current administration fee of $5 per space continues to cover implementation costs
10 In 2020, Council adopted the Tenant Relocation
Assistance Ordinance to protect displaced
tenants under certain conditions
•Adopted in July 2020 to
match new State law and
provide protections for
temporarily displaced tenants
•Requires that landlords pay
relocation assistance under
certain circumstances when a
tenant becomes displaced
from their unit
•Does not include imposition of
additional administrative fees
•Since adoption, there have
been 29 relocation cases and
22 (76%) of them have been
due to a Code Enforcement
Notice of Violation
11 The costs of administering the RRSO are
reimbursed through the rent stabilization fee
•Section 12-1.17(b):
• “The costs of administration of this ordinance shall be reimbursed in full to the Rental Housing Program Fund by imposition of a Rent stabilization administration fee chargeable against all Rental Units, including Covered Rental Units.”
•The original fees were established in 2019 based on budget analysis and benchmarking research to estimate expenses for implementing the RRSO
12 RRSO Implementation Accomplishments
The HHTF requested additional information on the implementation of the RRSO to date. This section provides a summary of activities required to implement the RRSO.
13 Implementing the RRSO requires significant ongoing
marketing, outreach, and education activities
Communication
•200 average
inquiries per
month
•Annual and ad
hoc mailings to
landlords and
tenants
Education
•Monthly
workshops
•City staff and
stakeholder
education
through Eviction
Prevention
Learning Lab
Community
engagement
•Over 50
community
events with
several local
partners
14 Implementation requires development and
maintenance of forms, notices, and processes to
facilitate compliance
•Create and maintain over a
dozen resources and forms in
three languages to facilitate
implementation and rent
review petition process
•Receipt, review, and tracking
of over 2,400 rent increase
notices and over 700
termination notices through
2022
•Process 117 petitions for
review of rent
•Process 8 capital
improvement pass-through
petitions covering hundreds of
units
•Manage mediation and
arbitration for the 40% of
petitions that advance to that
stage of the process
15 Implementation also requires ongoing internal
infrastructure improvements to meet demand and
improve accessibility
•Development and ongoing maintenance of rental unit inventory •Collaboration with other departments for EnerGov
implementation
•Development and ongoing maintenance of Bookings app to allow community members to make appointments online for in- person or phone appointments
16 RRSO Implementation & Unlawful Detainer
Data
This section provides a summary of data illustrating key trends. 17 Only 121 unlawful detainers filed since
first eviction moratorium
899
833
928
1030 1053
1003
1104
1217
1664
1485
1274
1346
1072
864
794
721
594 604 602 584
122 71 45
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Number of Filings
COVID-19 eviction
moratoria
18 Trends in notice submissions align
with changes in State law
• 772 notices received
through June 2022
• Before pandemic
protections, 86% were for a
failure to pay rent or utilities
• With pandemic protections,
95% were for a failure to pay
rent or utilities
161
126
108
13 17 22 19 18 18
59 14
73 114
59 139
98 85
32 2019
Q3
2019
Q4
2020
Q1
2020
Q2
2020
Q3
2020
Q4
2021
Q1
2021
Q2
2021
Q3
2021
Q4
2022
Q1
2022
Q2
Number of UD Filings Number of Notices
COVID-19 eviction
moratoria
19 351 UD
Filings
295 UD
Filings
200 days before RRSO
implementation
200 days after RRSO
implementation
15% reduction in UD filings
following RRSO
20 Spikes in the number of rent increases
related to large properties submitting
several notices at once
296
134
274
71 43 51 96 98
174 175
687
202
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2019
Q3
2019
Q4
2020
Q1
2020
Q2
2020
Q3
2020
Q4
2021
Q1
2021
Q1
2021
Q2
2021
Q3
2021
Q4
2022
Q1
Notices Submitted
COVID-19 eviction
moratoria
21 Covered rental units averaged lower increases
• Lower market-level average effective rent during the pandemic, with an increase in second half of 2021
• Banked increases lead to average increase over the threshold as allowed under the RRSO
4.3% 4.4%
3.7%
4.7% 4.5% 4.5% 4.6% 4.7% 5.0% 4.6% 5.0%
6.6%6.9%
4.8% 4.5%
NA
4.8% 4.8% 4.9% 5.0% 5.4%
4.5%
5.1%
3.8%
0.9%
2.7%
2.1%
1.2%
-0.8% -0.4% -1.1% -0.2%
3.8%
2.4%
4.5%
5.8%
-2.0%
-1.0%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
2019
Q3
2019
Q4
2020
Q1
2020
Q2
2020
Q3
2020
Q4
2021
Q1
2021
Q2
2021
Q3
2021
Q4
2022
Q1
2022
Q2
Covered Rental Units Rental Units Market Level
COVID-19 eviction
moratoria
22 RRSO Administration Fee Increase Analysis
This section describes the need for an increase to the RRSO administration fee to meet the requirements established by the RRSO.
23 The RRSO administration fee has not been
increased since it was established in July 2019
Initial calculation assumptions:
•Proportional distribution of
expenses for all units based on
the proportion of Covered
Rental Units (43%) and Rental
Units (57%) at the time
•Expenses directly related to
administering the Rent Review
Program for Covered Rental
Units were distributed 95% to
Covered Rental Units and 5% to
Rental Units
FY 19-20 Rates
Annual Fee per
Covered Rental Unit
$40
Annual Fee per
Rental Unit
$19
24 After 3.5 years, implementation costs consistently
exceed revenues, and a fee increase is necessary to
continue meeting the requirements of the RRSO
•No earlier fee increases due to increased economic constraints experienced by tenants and property owners during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic
•Other funds were used to offset RRSO and TRAO
administrative costs
•Expenses are rising across all Housing Division funds and other non-restricted fund balances are depleted
•Consistent with the requirements of the RRSO, staff
recommends increasing fee to achieve full cost recovery 25 Reductions in service would result in
inability to comply with the RRSO
•The HHTF directed staff to review areas to reduce expenses •Analysis indicates that any reductions, such as to staffing, consultant contracts, or marketing expenses negatively impacts RRSO implementation
• Risk of failing to comply with the RRSO
• Reduced ability to proactively inform stakeholders about their rights and responsibilities
• Reduced ability to share important changes, such as information about eviction moratoria or other significant state- or county-wide changes 26 Hayward’s proposed fee falls within the range of fees assessed by comparable jurisdictions that implement
renter protections
•On average, other jurisdictions increased fees by approximately 30% but have higher overall fees
•In cities with tiered structures like Hayward, Covered Rental Unit fees range from $226-$250 and Rental Unit fees range from $37-$127
•In cities with one fee for all units, the fees range from $12 to $101
• In Fremont, the fee is reduced because the program is a non-binding rent review program requiring less administration compared to Hayward
27 The proposed fee increase accounts for actual
implementation expenses
•The initial fees were developed based on estimates in 2019 •Proposed fee increase reflects:
• Staffing allocation from 2.75 FTE to 4.0 FTE
• Increase consultant capacity to account for almost 50% increase in petition volume and to continue service provision as required by the RRSO • Enhanced marketing efforts to improve accessibility, awareness, and compliance
•Proposed increase uses the same proportional allocation methodology as the original calculation and increases the fee proportionally based on percent increase of the budget
28 Proposed fee increase will cover
estimated expenses
Proposed Fee Increase
MH RU CRU
Fee per unit $5 $32 $66
Increase from FY 19 fee $0 $13 $26
Percent increase from FY
19 fee 0% 68% 65%
Total projected revenue $1,034,823
Legend: MH = Mobile Home Unit; RU = Rental Unit; CRU = Covered Rental Unit 29 The RRSO provides opportunities for cost
recovery for landlords
•Owners of Covered Rental Units may pass through half the cost of the fee to the tenants.
•Owners of Rental Units are not restricted by the City’s RRSO on increases that may cover the cost of the fee, though they may be subject to a State rent increase threshold.
•RRSO guarantees owners a fair return, so property owners whose net operating income does not exceed the increase in CPI during a specific period may file a fair return petition 30 Recommendation
31 Summation and Recommendation
•Increasing the fee ensures the City
can enforce the RRSO and maintain the
same level of service
•Landlords can recover at a minimum half of
the costs from the tenants
•Staff recommend increasing the RRSO
administration fees to recover the full cost of
implementation as required by the RRSO
32 Next Steps
33 If approved, staff will notify landlords of the fee
increase before next annual billing
March 2: HHTF
Discussion
March 28: City
Council Public
Hearing
July – August:
Landlord
outreach
September:
HHTF
informational
report on
implementation
and annual
billing process
October: Annual
invoices sent to
landlords
34 Questions
HAYWARD MUNICIPAL CODE
ITEM #8
PH 23-016
Affordable Housing
Ordinance Update
City Council Meeting
City of Hayward
March 28, 2023
Presentation overview
• Purpose of today’s item:
• Consider introduction of ordinance to amend the Affordable Housing Ordinance
• Consider adopting resolutions to change certain affordable housing in-lieu fees and to amend the FY 2024 Master Fee Schedule
• Today’s presentation:
• Summary of February 21st work session recommendations • Responses to work session questions
• Recommended actions
2 The AHO policy leverages market rate housing
production to produce affordable housing
• Applies to new market rate housing development projects • Does not directly control the types of projects proposed • AHO requires:
• % on-site deed-restricted affordable housing units and affordability levels of those units (“inclusionary” requirement)
• Other alternatives that produce affordable housing, or • Payment of in-lieu fees which subsidize the development of affordable housing • Last updated in 2017
• Increased in-lieu fees & applied the AHO to smaller projects • Increased flexibility for means of compliance
3 The AHO Study and update seeks to ensure
affordable housing production
• Revise the inclusionary housing requirements and in-lieu fees • Optimize the AHO’s potential to produce affordable housing 4 The AHO Study incorporated technical
analysis and stakeholder input
• Stakeholder and decisionmaker input:
• City Council and its Homelessness-Housing Task Force
• Planning Commission
• Community surveys
• Technical Advisory Committee (developers)
• Technical Analyses:
• Financial feasibility analyses of AHO and alternatives • “Affordability gap” calculations to inform in-lieu fee amounts 5 6
Recommendations Shared at the
February 21st Work Session
2/21 Recommendations: Inclusionary
Requirements
7 Existing AHO Recommended Revised AHO
Rental:
6% total inclusionary
• 3% Low income
• 3% Very low income
Rental:
No changes
Ownership
7.5% Moderate income if
more than 35 du/acre
10% Moderate income if less
than 35 du/acre
Ownership
No changes
12% if less than 35 du/acre
• 6% Low income
• 6% Moderate income
Recommended a 6% low-income & 6% moderate-
income requirement for lower-density ownership
products (12% total inclusionary)
• The low-income affordability level addresses HHTF and community priorities for meeting the needs of lower-income households • The moderate-income affordability level recognizes the AHO’s unique ability to provide ownership housing at this income level • Feasibility analyses show that this is the highest requirement reasonably supportable by single-family homes and townhomes • Higher-density ownership products and rental products cannot feasibly support higher inclusionary requirements
8 2/21 Recommendations:
Developer Paid In-Lieu Fees
9 Existing AHO Recommended Revised AHO
Rental:
$21.64 per square foot
Rental:
Maintain $21.64 per square foot
Ownership
$17.85 per square foot if more
than 35 du/acre
$21.64 per square foot if less
than 35 du/acre
Ownership
Maintain $17.85 per square foot if
project built at 35 du/acre or greater
$26 per square foot for projects built
at less than 35 du/acre
Recommended increasing in-lieu fees for
lower-density ownership products
• Increasing lower-density ownership fees better aligns fees with adjusted inclusionary recommendations, peer city fee levels • Maintaining other existing in-lieu fees acknowledges limited feasibility of these products, aligns with peer city fees • TAC members emphasized importance of in-lieu fees for providing flexibility as market conditions evolve
• Fee revenues provide critical City funding for affordable housing production
10 2/21 Administrative Amendments
Recommendations
Staff recommended the following amendments to improve
implementation of the AHO:
• Affordable Housing Cost: Revise to make definition inclusive of all housing costs • Marketing Plan: Revise to align with development process. Currently, plan is requested too early. Elaborate on requirements to affirmatively further fair housing and marketing in multiple languages
• Approval of Affordable Unit Phasing Plan: Revise to replace Council approval with approval by decision making body to streamline
2/21 Administrative Amendments
Recommendations-Continued
• Priority Preference: Add priority preference to people displaced by City activity in addition to live/work preference.
• Maximum Resale Price: Revise formula for calculated resale price to be consistent with existing city agreements that apply one of two indices instead of the lessor of the two indices.
• Administrative Cost: Increase the amount of in-lieu fees to be applied to administrative costs from 10% to 15%.
• Seven non substantive changes for clarification purposes only 13 Discussion of City Council
Questions/Interests
City Council guidance from the February 21
work session:
• Majority supported the proposed modifications
• Some interest in:
1. 15% on-site inclusionary requirement for ownership units
2. Increasing rental requirements or setting parameters for an increase
3. Historic uses of in-lieu fees
4. Factors contributing to Fremont’s production of inclusionary units
5. Incorporating commercial development timeline in the affordable housing phasing plan
6. Language indicating that the City prefers on-site inclusionary housing
7. Information about other City strategies for housing stability & affordability 14 Infeasible to Increase Homeownership Unit
Requirements to 15% While Including Low-Income
Units
• Shifting from a 10% moderate-income inclusionary requirement to a 6% low- and 6% moderate-income requirement (12% total) is already a major increase in requirements from a feasibility perspective
• At 15% (with low-income units), minor changes in development conditions make most single- family home and townhome project infeasible
15 Current Costs Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Increase in Hard Costs of Construction 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% Feasibility by Project Type
Single Family Development Marginally Feasible
Marginally
Feasible
Marginally
Feasible
Marginally
Feasible
Marginally
Feasible Marginally Feasible
Townhomes Marginally Feasible
Marginally
Feasible Infeasible Infeasible Infeasible Infeasible
Source: Strategic Economics, 2023.
Notes:
Projects considered "Feasible" if Return on Cost is greater than 25% Projects considered "Marginally Feasible" if Return on Cost is greater than 20% Projects considered "Infeasible" if Return on Cost is less than 20% Sensitivity Analysis Results for Ownership Units - Assuming 15 Percent Required Inclusionary and 50/50 Split Between Low and Moderate Income
Considering current infeasibility, increasing
requirements will only further constrain
development of rental housing
16 $75
$45 $25
$86
$22
-$10
$35
-$39
-$76-$63
-$162
-$212
-$177
-$272
-$320-$350
-$300
-$250
-$200
-$150
-$100
-$50
$0
$50
$100
$150
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Value per Square Foot of Land
Residual Land Value Results Under Existing AHO On-Site Inclusionary Requirements for Rental Products, by Market Tier
Land Price Small Multifamily Stacked Flats 5-Story Wrap 5-Story Podium (TOD) Strategic Economics, 2023.
Increasing AHO requirements for rental housing
would require an even larger increase in rents
before rental housing could be built
• Existing requirement is 3%
very low income and 3% low
income (6% total)
• Maintaining existing
requirement:
• Ensures affordable units are
produced if development
conditions improve
• Avoids adding additional
constraints
17 -2%
6% 9%7%
17%
23%
18%
31%
38%35%
51%
60%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Percent Change in NOI to Match Feasibilty
Threshold
Percent Change in Net Operating Income Required
to Achieve Feasibility Under Current AHO
Requirements, by Product Type and Market Tier
Small Multifamily Stacked Flats
5-Story Wrap 5-Story Podium (TOD)
Strategic Economics, 2023.
Selecting an automatic trigger for adjusting rental
inclusionary requirements is impractical due to the
many factors determining project feasibility
• No specific indices can capture the many factors that impact financial feasibility outcomes and link to a specific policy change • Example factors include achievable rents, materials costs, labor costs, financing costs, City fees, changing development standards • A future feasibility study should be used to adjust rental requirements if development conditions appear to positively change
18 Hayward in-lieu fees have funded 364 affordable
housing units in five 100% affordable developments
• $9.6 million of in-lieu fees
(Inclusionary Housing Trust
Funds)
• 67% of these units affordable to
“extremely low income” and
“very low income” households
• Leveraged in-lieu revenues to
receive nearly $4m in HCD Local
Housing Trust Funds
• Most other City contributions
were one-time sources
19 Project Project Type ELI VLI LI Total
units
Inclusionary
Housing
Trust
Other City Funds
Depot
Community
Apartments
Individuals 67 27 30 125 $1,610,000 $22,839,865
Mission
Paradise Senior 36 26 13 76 $3,764,720 $2,365,280
Pimentel
Place Family 35 11 10 57 $2,000,000 $238,951
Sequoia
Grove Ownership 0 0 10 10 $200,000 $600,000
Parcel Group
8 Affordable
Housing
Family 0 42 53 96 $2,000,000 $8,865,161
Total 138 106 116 364 $9,604,720 $34,909,257
City of Hayward Inclusionary Housing Trust Fund Commitments by Project
City of Hayward, 2023.
Higher household incomes and achievable rents
partly explain Fremont’s greater inclusionary
housing production
• Effective market-rate rents per
square foot are nearly 18%
higher in Fremont
• Fremont household incomes are:
• 65% higher for renters
• 51% higher for owners
• The differences partly explain
Fremont’s high inclusionary
housing production, even with
higher requirements (10% for
rentals)
20 On-Site Units Permitted, 2018-2021
0 20
40 60
80 100
120Housing Unit Permits
Owner Renter
Source: California HCD, RHNA Annual Progress Report, 2022 ; Strategic Economics, 2022.
Conditions of approval already include commercial
space delivery timing in mixed-use developments
• Affordable unit phasing plan requirements under the AHO may not apply to all projects
• Maintaining timing requirements as a separate condition of approval ensures timing requirements are applied to all mixed-use projects
• The proposed modification is intended to reduce confusion about affordable unit phasing plan with a development phasing plan • No additional requirement related to commercial development was added.
21 Staff modified the AHO findings language to
state a preference for on-site affordable units
• Language was added to the affordable housing ordinance to states Council’s preference for on-site affordable units to create mixed- income communities.
• The intent is to provide guidance to the developers but does not impose a requirement.
22 The City uses many additional strategies to
improve housing stability and affordability
• Residential Rent Stabilization and
Tenant Protection Ordinance
• Tenant Relocation Assistance
Ordinance
• Implementation of the Emergency
Relocation Assistance Fund
• Opening the Hayward Navigation
Center
• Incentives to Housing Production Work
Plan
• Let’s House Hayward! Strategic Plan
• Applying for State housing and
planning grants
23 • Funding contracts with services
providers to provide:
• Legal service for low-income
tenants
• Tenant/landlord mediation
• Fair housing testing
• Housing counseling
• Shallow rental subsidy
• Foreclosure prevention services
providers
• Fair housing organization
• Housing counselors
• Foreclosure prevention
24 Recommended Actions
Staff recommends:
• Modify the AHO to:
• Increase ownership inclusionary requirement for lower-density housing products to 6% low-income and 6% moderate-income
• Improve implementation by clarifying language, better aligning some of the requirements with the development process to streamline, and to conform requirements with existing affordable housing agreements and resale restrictions
• Adopt a resolution to increase the affordable housing in-lieu fee for lower density ownership projects from $21.64 to $26 per square foot
25 If approved:
• Changes to AHO effective 30 days after second reading and applied to all new affordable housing plans submitted
• Change to the fee effective with the FY 2024 Master Fee Schedule (July 1, 2023)
26 27
Thank you!
GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL
PROGRESS REPORT
ITEM #9
LB 23-012
1 Hayward 2040 General Plan
Annual Progress Report
City Council
March 28, 2023
2 Background
✓ Annual updates of the General Plan
(GP) implementation programs are
required by the California Government
Code
✓ GP annual progress report includes
measurable outcomes and actions
associated with the implementation of
all the General Plan elements.
✓ Once Council accepts the report, it is
forwarded to the State OPR and the
Housing and Community
Development office. No other action is
required from the Council.
3 Hayward 2040 General Plan
✓ Establishes a community-based vision for the
future of Hayward.
✓ Includes goals, policies and implementation
programs included in ten individual elements of
this General Plan (Land Use, Mobility,
Economic Development, Community Safety,
Natural Resources, Hazards, Education,
Community Health, Facilities/Services, and
Housing).
Hayward General Plan: A long-range
comprehensive plan that controls and regulates
land uses and development in the City through
2040. The General Plan was adopted in July 2014.
4 General Plan Priorities
Timelines of Program Implementation
Short & Near Term 107 Programs 2014-2019
59 Annual/Ongoing
48 One Time
Long Term 36 Programs 2020-2040
31 One Time
5 Annual/Ongoing
5 One Time Program vs. Annual/On-Going Program
One-Time Programs
• Downtown Specific Plan
• Traffic Impact Fee
• Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan
Annual/On-Going Programs
• General Plan Annual Reporting
• Grant Funding
• Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
6 Implementation Program Status
10%
63%
27%
6%
69%
25%
7 Completed Programs
2014-2019 Timeframe
Thirty programs identified for the 2014-2019
timeframe have been completed, some of
which include:
✓ Downtown City Center Specific Plan
✓ Pedestrian Master Plan
✓ Education and Lifelong Learning
Resource Center
✓ Park Dedication Requirements and
In-Lieu Fees
8 Programs In-Progress
2014-2019 Timeframe
Fifty-eight programs identified for the 2014-
2019 timeframe are currently in progress.
Some of these include:
✓ Library Strategic Plan and Annual
Report
✓ Homeless Services Partnership
program
✓ Updates to the Climate Action Plan,
Safety Element and adoption of a new
Environmental Justice Element
9 Programs Not Yet Started
2014-2019 Timeframe
Programs identified for the 2014-2019
timeframe not yet initiated due to limited
staff/fiscal resources and/or competing City
priorities include:
✓ Comprehensive updates to: Zoning
Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance,
Design Guidelines, and Off-Street
Parking Regulations
✓ Urban Forest Management Plan
✓ Updates to Grading Ordinance
10 Reprioritized Programs
Several programs identified for the 2020-
2040 timeframe that have been initiated
ahead of schedule include:
✓ City Building Energy
Efficiency Audits and Reports
✓ Neighborhood Traffic Calming
Policy
✓ Recycled water program
✓ Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
11 Upcoming Priorities in 2023 & Beyond
✓ General Plan Update
Housing Element, Environmental Justice Element,
Climate Action Plan)
✓ Density Bonus
✓ Homeless Services Partnership
✓ Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Programs that have been identified as
priorities and/or are currently in
progress for 2023 include:
11 12
Programs Aligned with Strategic Roadmap Projects
10%
63%
27%
6%
69%
25%
13 Programs Aligned with Strategic Roadmap Projects
Some of the programs in the General Plan identified in the City Council’s Strategic Roadmap (SRM) include:
• City’s Housing Element Update (GP Update, GPA-2)
Aligned with SRM Project:
Preserve, Protect and Produce Housing for All (9)
• Foreclosure Prevention Program (H-5)
Aligned with SRM Project:
Preserve, Protect and Produce Housing for All (11)
• Density Bonus Ordinance Update (H9)
Aligned with SRM Project:
Preserve, Protect and Produce Housing for All (4, 4b, 4f)
14 General questions from the Planning Commission
February 23, 2023
• Timing on the
implementation of several
of the programs that have
not started yet
• Possible reprioritization of
some of the programs that
are aligned with the
Strategic Road Map
15 Next Steps
✓ Council to accept report. No other formal
action needed.
✓ Staff will:
• Forward Annual Report to the State
• Update status of implementation
programs on n the City’s website
• Continue to provide an annual update
to the City Council on General Plan
implementation progress.
• Continue to take the lead on the
various programs, helping to
implement the General Plan’s goals
and policies.
16 Thank you!
Any questions?