Staff Report - Ordinance Adding Chapter 3.156 to the Sacramento City Code, Relating to Community Benefits Agreements — Law and Legislation Committee, April 18, 2023

City of Sacramento
Law and Legislation Committee Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2023-00351 4/18/2023 Discussion Item 5.

Ordinance Adding Chapter 3.156 to the Sacramento City Code, Relating to Community Benefits Agreements
File ID: 2023-00351
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: 1) Review Ordinance adding chapter 3.156 of the Sacramento City Code, relating to community benefits agreements; and 2) pass a Motion forwarding the Ordinance to City Council for consideration.

Contact: Ellen Sullivan, Senior Development Project Manager, (916) 808-5758, [email protected], Office of Innovation and Economic Development; Leslie Fritzsche, Community Investment Manager, (916) 808-5450, [email protected], Office of Innovation and Economic Development
Presenter: Ellen Sullivan, Senior Development Project Manager, (916) 808-5758, [email protected], Office of Innovation and Economic Development; Leslie Fritzsche, Community Investment Manager, (916) 808-5450, [email protected], Office of Innovation and Economic Development
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance
3-Draft Community Benefits Ordinance Framework
4-Sacramento Investment Without Displacement Comments on Draft Community Benefits Ordinance Framework
5-North State Building Industry Association Comments on Draft Community Benefit Ordinance Framework
6- Downtown Sacramento Partnership Comments on Draft Community Benefits Ordinance Framework
7-Aggie Square Settlement Agreement with the UC Regents and Sacramento Investment Without Displacement
8-Inclusive Economic Development Investment Guidelines
9-Sacramento Investment Without Displacement - Outstanding Issues Side-By-Side Comparison Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance

Page 1 of 5 ends

File ID: 2023-00351 4/18/2023 Discussion Item 5.
10-Sacramento Investment Without Displacement Community Benefit Comparison 11-Greater Sacramento Economic Council, Barry Broome, Comments on Draft CBO 12-Greater Sacramento Economic Council, Michelle Willard, Comments on Draft CBO Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: On May 12, 2021, the City of Sacramento, the Regents of the University of California, and Sacramento Investment Without Displacement (SacIWD) entered into a settlement agreement regarding the Aggie Square Project (“Settlement Agreement”, included as Attachment 7). The Settlement Agreement included a provision requiring the City to endeavor to bring forward a community benefits agreements ordinance (CBO) for City Council consideration by January 1, 2022.

The City and SacIWD have since agreed to extend that deadline multiple times, most recently to the end of May, 2023.

The City has drafted a proposed CBO that requires certain development projects receiving $10 million or more in economic development subsidies from the City to enter into a community benefits agreement “CBA”)) a condition of receiving the subsidy. The proposed CBO is included as Attachment 2. The ordinance contains terms that each CBA must include such as: local hire, compliance with prevailing wage law, small and local business support, anti-displacement strategies, provisions for affordable housing, transportation projects, and other project specific benefits , although
the City Council may waive some of these terms if it finds that they are not warranted under the circumstances. The proposed ordinance also contains language ensuring community input in the process and provides for the City Manager to develop policies and procedures to implement and enforce the CBO.

Staff is asking Law and Legislation Committee to review the draft ordinance and, if acceptable, forward the proposed CBO to City Council for approval.

Policy Considerations: The addition of chapter 3.156 to the City Code is an extension of the City’s Inclusive Economic Development Investment Guidelines approved by Council in 2019 (included as Attachment 8) and would be the next step in the Inclusive Economic Development initiative by codifying the City’s commitment to promote inclusive economic and community development.

Additionally, a CBO is consistent with City Council’s adopted “Policy to Take Comprehensive, Intentional Actions to Increase and Diversify our Economic Growth in an Inclusive and Equitable Manner that Focuses on Neighborhoods and Their Unique Needs” approved by Council on July 31, 2018.

Economic Impacts: Not applicable.

Environmental Considerations: The adoption of the ordinance would provide general guidelines related to the requirement of a CBA in connection with city subsidies, as defined in the ordinance, for large projects. This is intended to replace
ad hoc consideration of such agreements. The ordinance is

Page 2 of 5 ends

File ID: 2023-00351 4/18/2023 Discussion Item 5.
not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves administrative and fiscal activities of the city without commitment to any project, and without any physical change in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(b)(4) and (b)(5).) Therefore, the action to adopt the ordinance is not subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3).) Sustainability: None.

Commission/Committee Action: This item was previously heard by Law and Legislation Committee on March 29, 2022. Information regarding the discussion is included in the Background section below.

Rationale for Recommendation: The proposed CBO is an extension of the City’s Inclusive Economic Development Investment Guidelines and provides consistency and certainty for developers and community members when the City is providing an economic subsidy of $10 million or more to a significant development project. The CBO was drafted based on the terms of the Aggie Square Settlement Agreement, direction received from the Law and Legislation Committee and City Management, as well as input from the Investment Committee and Sacramento Investment Without Displacement.

Financial Considerations: None.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.

Background: As a component of the Settlement Agreement, the City is required to work with SacIWD, to develop the CBO. Once the CBO is drafted, it is to be considered for adoption by City Council. The proposed CBO would require CBAs for certain projects receiving economic subsidies within the meaning of Government Code section 53083
.

The Settlement Agreement included provisions regarding what the CBO should contain:
(A) Identification of criteria for determining which projects receiving economic subsidies from the City will require CBAs;
(B) Provisions for community enforcement of the CBAs;
(C)A transparent accountability process that includes a Public Oversight Committee that is guided by an inclusive, comprehensive, community-driven process; and (D)Provisions in the CBAs for long term small/local business protection, anti-displacement strategies, and production of affordable housing to be developed with SaclWD, affected residents, and other relevant community partners.

On March 29, 2022, Staff brought a draft concept to Law and Legislation Committee for consideration. The direction received at Law and Legislation Committee was to craft a CBO that is

Page 3 of 5 ends

File ID: 2023-00351 4/18/2023 Discussion Item 5.
flexible and has a high-dollar threshold (for example, $10 million) to “kickstart” the requirement for a CBA. City management has also indicated support for this approach.

On August 9, 2022, the Investment Committee Financial Tools Working Group met to discuss the proposed CBO. The Working Group discussed the importance of flexibility in the ordinance. In addition, the Working Group expressed that the CBO should apply to large, transformative projects and to be sensitive in making sure such a requirement doesn’t make development so difficult that it results in developers not wanting to do business in the City.

On October 3, 2022, the Inclusive Economic and Community Development Investment Committee discussed the proposed CBO. The Committee also discussed what amount of subsidy would require a CBA and what types of benefits could be included in CBAs.

Community Benefits Ordinance Framework
As a next step, staff drafted a Community Benefits Ordinance Framework (Attachment 3). The CBO Framework was based on the direction received at Law and Legislation Committee and from City management. It is streamlined and flexible in nature and is in keeping with what the City agreed to in the Aggie Square Settlement Agreement.

Staff shared the draft CBO framework with SacIWD and the development community for input.

Sacramento Investment Without Displacement (SacIWD)
Since February 2022, City and representatives of SacIWD have been meeting to discuss the proposed CBO. SacIWD shared the results of their community outreach and provided ordinance language, as well as feedback on the City’s draft CBO Framework (Attachment 4).

SacIWD’s feedback on the CBO Framework is generally that the $10 Million in economic development subsidy is too high an amount to require a CBA and there should be additional considerations to require a CBA such as building square footage. Additionally, they expressed that the definition of economic development subsidy is too narrow. SacIWD also would like more minimum benefits listed in the CBO.

Development Community Outreach
On August 15, 2022, the City presented the concept of a CBO to members of the business and development community. Approximately 30 people attended and there were members of SacIWD present also. The group felt that they needed a draft CBO or CBO Framework to react to and recommended that the City reach out to a larger group of the development community.

On September 8, 2022, the City presented the concept of the CBO to the North State Building Industry Association Infill Council (BIA). The group provided comments of support for the affordable housing exemption and the dollar threshold. The Infill Council indicated they would provide written

Page 4 of 5 ends

File ID: 2023-00351 4/18/2023 Discussion Item 5.
comments. On March 10, 2023, the BIA provided written comments on the proposed CBO Framework (Attachment 5). The BIA indicated concerns that Community Financing District bonds or their proceeds should not apply to the CBO $10 million threshold, exclude routine public financing of housing projects from the CBO, and include a provision that only the types of funds listed in the CBO may be used for the calculation of the subsidy for purposes of the CBO.

On October 25, 2022, the City met with a group of downtown developers at a round-table style meeting facilitated by the Downtown Sacramento Partnership (DSP) to discuss the draft CBO Framework. As a follow-up to the meeting, DSP provided written comments outlining concerns with the proposed CBO Framework (Attachment 6). DSP indicates a primary concern is that the $10 million threshold is too low and should have an inflation adjustment. Additionally, DSP would like the scope of projects qualifying for a CBA better defined. Staff has since met with DSP’s Policy Committee twice to provide the ordinance and continue to obtain feedback.

Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance
Utilizing the comments received from the development community and SacIWD on the draft CBO Framework and direction from City Management, staff outlined the CBA ordinance components and provided direction to the City Attorney’s Office to draft the CBO.

The City provided the draft CBO to SacIWD on March 8, 2023, for their review. Subsequently, it was posted to the City’s website. The City’s Community Engagement team sent out a notification email to the business and development community on March 23, 2023, to notify them that the draft CBO was available for review and the date of the Law and Legislation Committee meeting. To date, we have received comments from SacIWD which are included as Attachments 9 and 10 and the Greater Sacramento Economic Council which are included as Attachments 11 and 12.

On April 3, 2023, the Inclusive Economic and Community Development Investment Committee discussed the proposed CBO. Four members provided comments and they related to suggested inclusion of baseline metrics and targets for local hire; questions related to the dollar amount of the threshold, types of business support and technical assistance; and consideration for the inclusion of the arts.

Page 5 of 5 ends

1 ORDINANCE NO.

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
Date Adopted
AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 3.156 TO THE SACRAMENTO

CITY CODE, RELATING TO COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENTS
BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO:

SECTION 1.

Chapter 3.156 is hereby added to the Sacramento City Code to read as follows:

Chapter 3.156 COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENTS

3.156.010 Definitions.

The following definitions apply in this chapter:
“Affordable dwelling unit” means a dwelling unit that (i) will be rented at an affordable rent or sold at an affordable housing price and (ii) will have a regulatory agreement recorded on title, requiring the unit to remain affordable for a period of no less than 30 years.
“Affordable housing price” means a sales price of a for-sale dwelling unit that requires a low-income household to expend no more than 35% of its income on housing expenses (mortgage principal and interest, taxes, insurance, and assessments). “Affordable rent” means a monthly rent that does not exceed 2% of median income, adjusted for household size appropriate to the unit, less a reasonable allowance for utilities.
“Community benefits agreement” means a written contract between the city and a subsidized party that includes the terms by which the city will provide a development subsidy and the public benefits that the subsidized party must provide in exchange. “Completed project” means a development project for which the city has issued a certificate of occupancy for all structures.
“Development project” means the construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure.
“Development subsidy” means the city’s expenditure of public funds or loss of revenue to subsidize a development project in the city, in a cumulative amount equal to or greater than the threshold amount, in the form of bonds, grants, below-market-rate

2 loans, loan guarantees, fee waivers, land price subsidies, tax abatements, tax exemptions, and tax credits, whether approved by the city in a single act or multiple acts. “Development subsidy” does not include an expenditure or loss in any amount as part of: (i) a public project, as defined in section 3.60.010; (ii) a development project being carried out by a nonprofit corporation formed under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law (Cal. Corp. Code §5110 et seq.); (iii) the disposal or acquisition of land under California Government Code section 37364; (iv) the development of housing where at least 50% of the dwelling units are affordable dwelling units; or (v) the sale or lease of land under the Surplus Land Act (Cal. Gov. Code §54220 et seq.). “Dwelling unit” has the same meaning as in section 17.108.050. “Low-income household” means a household whose income does not exceed 80% of median income, adjusted for family size.
“Local area” means Sacramento, Yolo, Placer, El Dorado, Amador, San Joaquin, Sutter, Yuba, Nevada, and Sierra counties.
“Median income” means the median income applicable to Sacramento County, as published and annually updated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937. “Priority order” means priority is given from highest to lowest to: residents of the city; residents of Sacramento County, outside of the city; and residents of Yolo, Placer, El Dorado, Amador, San Joaquin, Sutter, Yuba, Nevada, and Sierra counties. “Subsidized party” means a person who is or will be the direct beneficiary of a development subsidy.
“Threshold amount” means $10,000,000, as adjusted in section 3.156.040.

3.156.020 Community benefits agreement - required.

A. A subsidized party shall enter into a community benefits agreement as a condition of receiving a development subsidy.

B. The community benefits agreement must include the terms required under section 3.156.030 and any other terms required by the city or agreed upon by the city and the subsidized party.

C. The city council may only approve a development subsidy if it approves a community benefits agreement at the same time.

3.156.030 Community benefits agreement – terms.

A. Except as provided in subsection C, each community benefits agreement must include the following terms:

3 1. To the extent permitted by law, a term requiring the subsidized party and its contractors, subcontractors (not including suppliers), and tenants to employ residents of the local area in priority order to:
a. Perform work on the development project for which the city is providing the development subsidy;
b. Perform work to improve, maintain, and repair the completed project; and
c. Work in businesses located in the completed project.

2. A term requiring the subsidized party and its contractors and subcontractors to comply with California’s prevailing wage law (Cal. Labor Code §1770 et seq.) in connection with the development project.

3. A term specifying a clearly identifiable class of persons who will be third- party beneficiaries under the community benefits agreement.

4. A term requiring the following indemnity language: “The subsidized party shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the city, its officers, employees, and agents from and against all claims, actions, losses, damages, liability, costs and expenses of every type and description, including, but not limited to, attorney fees, to which any or all of them may be subjected by reason of, or resulting from, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, the community benefits agreement.”

5. Terms requiring the subsidized party to:

a. Provide small and local businesses with support, such as technical assistance, increased access to capital, or resources for building improvements; b. Implement anti-displacement strategies, such as those intended to create stable tenancies, create paths to home ownership, provide secure employment opportunities, or enable small businesses to grow; c. Provide affordable dwelling units; and
d. Undertake transportation projects or initiatives, such as those that enhance community connectivity, improve transportation options, or promote motor-vehicle-traffic-reducing measures.

B. In addition to the terms in subsection A, the city may require a community benefits agreement to include terms that require project-specific community benefits that it finds are warranted under the circumstances.

4 C. The city council may approve a community benefits agreement that does not include any term under subsection A.5 that it expressly finds is not warranted under the circumstances.

3.156.040 Adjustment of threshold amount.

A. During the years 2023 through 2027, the threshold amount is $10,000,000.

B. Every 60 months beginning on January 1, 2028, the threshold amount shall be adjusted automatically to take into consideration inflation by a factor equal to the percentage increase, if any, in the construction cost index for San Francisco (based on 1913 U.S. average = 100) during the 60 months ending on the preceding September 1 as published by Engineer News Record/McGraw-Hill Construction Weekly, or any substitute index that the city council adopts by resolution. The city manager or the city manager’s designee shall calculate the adjustment, if any, to the threshold amount and shall advise the city clerk of the amended threshold amount.

3.156.050 Community input.

The city manager shall seek the input of the community that is or will be affected by the development project when developing the terms of, and evaluating the subsidized party’s performance under, the community benefits agreement.

3.156.060 Policies and procedures.

The city manager may adopt policies and procedures to implement and enforce the provisions of this chapter.

Draft Community Benefits Ordinance Framework

Definitions.
“Community benefits agreement” means a written contract between the city and a subsidized party that includes the terms by which the city will provide a development subsidy and the public benefits that the subsidized party must provide in exchange. “Development project” means the construction, reconstruction, demolition, or alteration of the size of any structure.
“Development subsidy” means an expenditure of public funds by, or loss of revenue to, the city in the amount of $10,000,000 or more in a single transaction, to subsidize a development project within the city limits of the city, including bonds, grants, below-market-rate loans, loan guarantees, fee waivers, land price subsidies, tax abatements, tax exemptions, and tax credits. “Development subsidy” does not include an expenditure by, or loss of revenue to, the city in connection with a public project, as defined in section 3.60.010; a development project being carried out by a nonprofit corporation formed under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law (California Corporations Code section 5110 et seq.); the disposal or acquisition of land under California Government Code section 37364; the development of housing that meets the affordability requirements under subdivisions (c) and (f) of California Government Code section 37364; or the sale or lease of land under the Surplus Land Act (California Government Code section 54220 et seq.).
“Subsidized party” means a person who is or will be the direct beneficiary of a development subsidy.

Community benefits agreement - required.

A. As a condition of receiving a development subsidy, the subsidized party shall enter into community benefits agreement.

B. The community benefits agreement must include, at a minimum, the required terms below and any other terms agreed upon by the city and the subsidized party.

C. The city council shall approve the community benefits agreement at the same time that it approves the development subsidy.

Community benefits agreement – terms.

A. Each community benefits agreement must include the following terms:

1. A term requiring the subsidized party and its contractors and subcontractors to hire local residents to perform work on the development project for which the city is providing the development subsidy.

2. A term requiring the subsidized party and its contractors and subcontractors to comply with California’s prevailing wage law in connection with the development project (California Labor Code section 1770 et seq.).

3. A term that specifies a clearly identifiable class of people who will be third-party beneficiaries under the community benefits agreement.

B. On a case-by-case basis, the city manager may also require a community benefits agreement to include terms related to:

1. Long-term small and local business protection;

2. Anti-displacement strategies;

3. Affordable housing; and

4. Other project-specific community benefits.

Community input.

Policies and procedures.

The city manager may adopt policies and procedures for the implementation of the provisions of this chapter.

1536 Eureka Road o: 916 677 5717
Roseville, CA 95661 northstatebia.org

March 10, 2023

Mrs. Leslie Fritzsche
Economic Investment Manager
Office of Innovation and Economic Development
City Manager’s Office
City of Sacramento
915 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Mrs. Fritzsche,

On behalf of the North State Building Industry Association (BIA) and our more than 530 homebuilders, residential developers and related business members, I am writing to offer our suggestions for the Community Benefits Ordinance being crafted by the City of Sacramento.

We have no objection to this ordinance, but it is critical that it is clearly written so it does not inadvertently create an unintended barrier to the creation of much-needed housing in the City of Sacramento. As you know, the city has ambitious goals for housing, especially attainable housing, and as the leading advocates for new home development we want to be partners in meeting those objectives.

We would request that the next draft of the Community Benefits Ordinance (CBO) include the specific clarifications below as to what counts towards the $10 million threshold:

1) Clearly state that this ordinance is exclusively for projects that are transformative in nature and its use should be the exception, not the rule.

2) Preclude the use of fee credits or Community Financing District (CFD) bonds or proceeds in the calculation of the $10 million threshold. Most projects involve some form of fee credits that arise for a variety of reasons. It is also routine for most projects to work through the city to secure bond financing from state JPAs to cover CFD costs, including through the BOLD or SCIP programs. The current draft ordinance specifically states that it applies to “bonds” which would be problematic for most projects.

3) Public funds distributed through the city, SHRA, or otherwise, used to finance attainable housing projects should be counted. Many projects have affordable housing components that will incorporate some kind of city funding, so this routine funding arrangement should not trigger the Community Benefits Ordinance.

1536 Eureka Road o: 916 677 5717
Roseville, CA 95661 northstatebia.org

4) Aggregating of incentives does not trigger the CBO, even if, when combined, they total more than $10 million. Many housing projects may reach that dollar amount if the ordinance is interpreted too broadly.

5) Include a provision that only the types of funds listed in the ordinance, and nothing else, may be used in the calculation of the subsidy for purposes of the CBO.

We appreciate your attention to our concerns. The BIA looks forward to continuing our work together on addressing the housing crisis in Sacramento.

Sincerely,

Chris Norem
Government Affairs
North State Building Industry Association

From: Liz Lorand Williams
To: Leslie Fritzsche; Ellen E. Sullivan
Cc: Annie Keys
Subject: Comments | Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance Framework Date: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 1:49:21 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
Leslie and Ellen,

Thank you again for your continued wiliness to welcome feedback on the framework for the proposed CBAO. As a follow up to our stakeholder discussion, I am writing to convey concerns related to the framework for the Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance that we recommend be addressed in order to complement the desire for increased capital investment in the Central City.

One of our primary concerns with the current Community Benefits Agreement Ordinance framework is the funding threshold by which projects trigger an agreement. The threshold of 10 million dollars in city subsidies is a one-size-fits-all model that has the implication to apply to various projects in dramatically different ways. Instead, we recommend an increased threshold or consider a percentage of the entire project’s funding in subsidies as a potential trigger for a community benefit agreement. In addition, Downtown Sacramento Partnership harbors concerns regarding the lack of a mechanism within the ordinance to adjust for inflation. Understandably 10 million dollars today will not hold the same value as it will in ten years. Should the funding threshold remain a fixed dollar amount, we urge you to include an inflation adjustment in the ordinance.

We also request that the scope of projects that are eligible for a Community Benefits Agreement be defined clearly in the ordinance. Specifically, the ordinance should reiterate the role of infrastructure improvements as separate elements that would not on their own trigger a community benefits agreement.

Lastly, it is vital the Community Benefits Agreement does not evolve in silo but rather as part of the City’s holistic plan as it relates to economic development and the ability to nurture Sacramento as a good destination for capital. In particular, the ecosystem of the urban core has shifted dramatically following the height of the Covid pandemic, and now is the most crucial time to spur strategic economic investment to bolster the future of the city.

Downtown Sacramento Partnership and stakeholders are concerned additional ordinances related to building development could place undue burden on prospective investors, thereby stifling the potential for economic growth in the urban core.

Downtown Sacramento Partnership urges you to adjust the current funding threshold, provide a mechanism to adjust for inflation, and further define the scope of projects that would qualify for a community benefits agreement in the ordinance framework before it is presented to the Law & Legislation committee.

We appreciate your engagement with addressing concerns for CBAO framework and Downtown Partnership continues to stand ready to be a partner in these efforts.

In Partnership,
Liz

Liz Lorand Williams

POLICY MANAGER
[email protected]
OFFICE 916-287-9958
CELL 530-903-1718
980 9th Street, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95814
DowntownSac.org + GoDowntownSac.com

Experience #DowntownSac! Explore the directory and sign up for eNewsletters.

Inclusive Economic Development Investment Funding Guidelines – September 2019

INCLUSIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT FUNDING GUIDELINES

1. DEFINITIONS
Inclusive Economic Development Investments or Investments: Investments that expand economic opportunities that benefit underserved and underrepresented communities, thereby reducing social, racial, health, and economic disparities in these communities.

Through public and private actions that are responsive to community need and builds on resident assets, these investments foster small business growth, increase quality jobs, stabilizes people in safe and affordable homes, prepare resident of all ages to fill those jobs, improve neighborhoods, and increase household wealth.

Equity: Fair and just treatment, access, opportunities, and advancement for all people, while identifying and eliminating barriers that have prevented the full participation of some groups.

Racial and gender equity: The development of policies, practices, and strategic investments to reverse racial disparity trends, eliminate institutional racism, and ensure that outcomes and opportunities for all people are no longer predictable by race and gender.

Priority neighborhoods: Neighborhoods already having a federal, state, or local designation (could include city Priority Neighborhood, federal Promise Zone, federal Opportunity Zone, Health Need Assessment Focus Communities, etc.) or neighborhoods experiencing a cost of living that outpaces the incomes of the residents, lagging commercial and residential investment, increased poverty and gentrification pressures; limited access to services and amenities, substantial change due to major development and/or public infrastructure improvements and local business displacement.

2. PURPOSE
The purpose of Inclusive Economic Development Investments is to foster economic and community development and job growth within the City of Sacramento that create opportunities for all of Sacramento’s residents, while at the same time prioritizing strategic investments for people of color, low-income individuals, and underinvested communities. The Fund will use city dollars to make Inclusive Economic Development Investments in projects and programs that advance inclusive economic development and reduce inequities by improving the health, stability and economic security of residents and neighborhoods; fostering business and job growth; increasing household wealth; encouraging productivity; and supporting people, places, and actions that promote economic growth throughout the City’s diverse communities.

3. OBJECTIVES
Investments must seek to advance economic growth and development by achieving the following objectives:

Inclusive Economic Development Investment Funding Guidelines – September 2019

A. Catalyze Inclusive Economic Development: Investments must help to further develop and/or grow targeted industry clusters, tradeable sectors and university-industry innovation districts. Investments must catalyze economic development and community revitalization in targeted geographic areas that increase the economic security and mobility of vulnerable families and workers.

B. Stimulate Job Growth: Investments must help retain and grow job opportunities by cultivating the entrepreneurial ecosystem, attracting new businesses that create a range of quality jobs, and supporting the growth and advancement of existing businesses. Investments must also support hiring and retaining of low income and historically underserved and underrepresented residents.

C. Create Experiential and Educational Opportunities: Investments must expand access to experiential and educational opportunities that lead to career pathways that lead to the middle class. Investments must also cultivate homegrown talent through strong cradle-to-career pipelines that increase economic security and access to job opportunities for all residents, with a focus on those communities and residents that have been historically underserved and underrepresented.

D. Create Vibrant, healthy, opportunity-rich neighborhoods: With the goal of reducing racial, social, health, and economic disparities, Investments must increase the supply and access to safe and affordable housing, transit and transportation options, promote clean and safe neighborhoods, create positive youth development experiences, and remove barriers to future economic development, particularly in distressed and disadvantaged neighborhoods that have not benefited from previous economic growth.

Investments must ensure all communities have access to services and amenities that support healthy and vibrant neighborhoods.

E. Increase Revenue and other Social and Economic Benefits to the City:

Investments must directly or indirectly increase City revenue and/or generate other significant public benefits (as outlined in Section 5F - Public Benefit) that provide a return on investment to the City.

4. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
The guiding principles are based on equity-focused practices that guide all Investments.

A. Neighborhoods and Places – Make all neighborhoods healthy and safe communities of full opportunity. Unlock opportunities for residents to Inclusive Economic Development Investment Funding Guidelines – September 2019

access options that offer affordable, safe and stable housing, amenities, culture and services, and maximize quality of life. Proactively support: (1) communities of color and (2) underserved residents and businesses within “priority neighborhoods”.

B. Community Engagement – Build community ownership, voice and capacity.

Tap into community-rooted organizations and neighborhood groups to develop community driven solutions that advance equitable and inclusive development priorities, policies and practices over the long term. Projects and programs will be vetted through the impacted neighborhood, community, and/or stakeholder(s) to ensure that they meet the needs of the community.

C. People and Jobs – Expand employment opportunities. Concentrate workforce development programs, increase talent pipelines, address skills gaps, and expand employment opportunities at all levels and for all ages including youth and young adults.

D. Business and Innovation – Advance equity, diversity, and inclusion throughout Sacramento’s business community. Expand ownership opportunities at all stages and ensure new development and growth happens in a way that benefits the entire community.

E. Integrate a focus on people, place and the economy. Understand that the City of Sacramento—and the neighborhoods where low-income people of color live— need strategies that are embedded in a broader metropolitan economy, and act to create more connections and linkages between their underserved residents and the local and regional economy. These strategies:
• Are place-based and people-oriented;
• Leverage business and financing models that are equity driven; and • Identify resources and innovate new ways of working with markets and investors to achieve inclusive and equitable solutions.

F. Embrace equity as an economic imperative. Engage private sector businesses to identify long-term, bottom-line benefits of racial and economic equity in their business models.

5. MINIMUM ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The City may consider making an Investment in projects and programs that have a significant economic impact and meet the following criteria:

A. Equity and Inclusion: Demonstrate strategies that ensure all Sacramento’s residents, particularly for people of color, low-income individuals and underinvested communities have the ability to participate, prosper, and reach Inclusive Economic Development Investment Funding Guidelines – September 2019

their full potential. Investments will provide goals and measurable outcomes to reduce disparities and build equity in the City’s diverse communities. All applications and subsequent agreements must include a statement of how the project or program reduces inequities and creates opportunities for Sacramento’s underserved and underrepresented communities. As appropriate, agreements should support capacity - building by connecting existing community needs and activities to new resources and opportunities.

B. Mutual Benefits and Consistency with City policy and goals: All Investments must be consistent with City policies and goals for achieving an inclusive and equitable community . Both the City’s and prospective partners' goals and the mutual benefits should be openly and clearly stated in all agreements.

C. Employment: Create and/or retain jobs with defined salary ranges based on Sacramento area and industry income standards or within priority career pathways as identified in the City’s Inclusive Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan or policies. Priority should be placed on creating job opportunities for underserved residents and in underserved neighborhoods.

D. Tax Revenue Generation: Provide significant property and/or sales tax revenues to the City. This amount will take into consideration the relative size of the project or program and its contribution to the City and community.

E. Leverage: Investment should be leveraged by other private or public funds and innovative partnerships. Projects and programs must demonstrate long-term financial sustainability.

F. Public Benefit: Investment s must provide a public benefit for residents and businesses in Sacramento. All applications and subsequent agreements must include a statement of public benefits. Benefits should distinguish between one- time/upfront cost reductions and ongoing reduction to everyday expenses to the targeted groups. Programs and projects will address an array of social and economic benefits that improve quality of life, including , but not limited to :

• Mobility
• Housing supply, affordability , quality and integration • Workforce development
• Employment opportunities for disadvantaged populations • Business diversification
• High- wage industry growth
• Sustainability (including air, water, and environmental quality ; energy efficiency ; clean energy, etc.)
Inclusive Economic Development Investment Funding Guidelines – September 2019

• Public health and wellness
• Public safety and emergency response
• Arts and cultur al amenities
• Youth and education

6. APPROVAL PROCEDURES
A. City Staff and Investment Committee Vetting: Investment applications will be screened by City staff and vetted with the Investment Committee. Investments of Measure U funds will be forwarded to the Measure U Citizens Advisory Committee.

B. Measure U Advisory Committee Recommendation: Pursuant to City Resolution 2018-0393, the Measure U Advisory Committee will review, report, and make non- binding recommendations on how to allocate resouces to support inclusive community economic development. Such expenditures, not subject to City Council approval, shall be forwarded to the City Manager with a recommendation.

7. INVESTMENT MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION
Evaluation of performance measures is critical to gauge the effectiveness of the Investments. Each investment agreement must contain a set of performance measures.

The City will require tracking and reporting of data during project/program implementation.

8. EVAULATION OF GUIDELINES AND INVESTMENTS
Staff will provide regular updates to the Investment Committee and Measure U Advisory Committee on the status of the City’s Investment portfolio. Each year the City will conduct an annual assessment of the guidelines to identify areas for updating, refinement, and/or adjustments.

9. PROGRAMS AND GUIDELINES
The Investments will support two programs:
a. Neighborhood and Community Investments
b. Economic Development Investments

Each program will have program guidelines to determine and identify eligible projects and programs. Program guidelines could include an overview of the program fund, additional eligibility requirements, identification of what can and cannot be funded, how much funding is available, how projects and programs are selected, and metric and reporting requirements.

SIWDandCitySide-By-SideComparisononOutstandingIssues
OutstandingIssue
CityPosition SIWDPosition
KickstarterAmount(ie, whatprojectswill aCBAbeappliedto) $10millionof publicinvestment asthekickstarterfor whenaprivateproject receivingpublicmoneywill berequiredtodoaCommunityBenefitsAgreement (CBA) Publicinvestment includestheCity’sexpenditureofpublicfundsor lossof revenuetosubsidizeadevelopment project inthecityintheformofbonds, grants, below-market-rateloans, loanguarantees, feewaivers, landpricesubsidies, taxabatements, taxexemptions, andtaxcredits.

Exemptsall nonprofitsregardlessof their size.

1. $10millionistoohighandtheCitydefinespublicinvestment toonarrowly. For example, it doesnotexpresslyincludeEIFDs(or other taxincrement financing)or upzoningor other regulatoryconcessionsbytheCityworthsignificant monetaryvaluetodevelopers. And, itimproperlyexcludesthesaleor leaseof publiclandevenwhennot for affordablehousing.

Veryfewprojectsreceivethislevel of Cityinvestmentwhichmeansthecommunitywill veryrarelyobtainthebenefitsof aCBA.

Thisamount isinconsistent withbothprior andcurrentcommunitysentiment andthesettlement agreement inAggieSquare. SIWDhasput forward$3millionasamorereasonablekickstarter.

2. It alsofailstoincludeanalternatekickstarter for largedevelopment projectslikelytohaveasignificantcommunityimpact wheresignificantlylesspublicinvestment isneeded. ThisleavesthecommunityvulnerableandtheCityinthelurch.

3. Giventhehighamount of publicsubsidyproposedbytheCityandthescaleof development projectsthat CBAswill beappliedto, excludingnonprofit corporations regardlessof their sizedoesnot makesensegiventhatverylargeentitieslikehospital systemsarealsosometimesnonprofits.

MinimumCommunityBenefitsRequiredFromProjects
Nominimumcommunitybenefitsor thresholdofbenefits. It requiresbroadtypesof benefitstobeincludedfor local business, anti-displacement,affordablehousing, andtransportationinitiatives,however therearenorequirementsfor howlittleorhowmuchisrequiredinexchangefor themillionsof dollarsof publicinvestment tohelpsubsidizeprojects.

Requiresprevailingwagefor contractorsandsubcontractorsof thedevelopment.

Requiresanunspecifiedamount of local hiringfortheproject.

Thecurrent ordinancealsocreatesanenormousexceptionthat permitstheCityCouncil tovotenottorequireanybenefitsat all for local business,anti-displacement, housing, or transportation.

1. TheCity’scurrent proposal failstoincludespecificminimumcommunitybenefitsincritical areassuchasanti-displacement, housing, transportation, workforcedevelopment, andsmall andlocal businessprotectiontooffset theimpactsof thesemajor development projects.

Instead, it hasbroadcategoriesof benefitsthat mustbecoveredbut without anythresholdsensuringthat thosebenefitsaremeaningful or at thescaleof theimpactsoftheproject. Theexceptionpermittinganyor all of thebenefitstobevotedawayisoverlybroadandlacksanystandardsprotectingthecommunityfromsuchawaiver ofbenefits.

Thiscreatesgreat uncertaintyof meaningful benefitstothecommunitytomitigateimpactsfromthesemajordevelopment projectswhileguaranteeingmaximumflexibilityfor thedevelopersof projects.

SIWDhasproposedrequiring:● 25%of residential unitsintheproject beaffordabletoverylowincomehouseholds● Onetoonereplacement of anyaffordableunitsdemolishedbytheproject● Fundingfor rentersandhomeownersindirectlydisplacedbytheproject that must haveameasurableimpact onkeepingrenters/ownersintheir homes ● Fundingtoaddressunmet transportationneedsidentifiedbythecommunity● Alivingwage, specificlocal hiringpercentages,andother specificworkforcebenefitslikelaborpeaceandlimitsontemporary/part-timepositions● Theinclusionof aChildcareandSupport Plantoaddressworkers’ childcareneeds

2. Additionally, thecurrent proposal usesadefinitionof“affordablerent” that isinconsistent withthestandardsusedbyaffordablehousingdeveloperswhichwill createneedlesscomplication.

CommunityNegotiation
TheCity'sproposedCBAOrdinanceonlyrequiresseekinginput fromthecommunitythat will beaffectedbytheproject. It doesnot requireor createameaningful roleinthenegotiationsonsubstantivebenefitsfor thecommunityandlocal residents.Onlytheproject sponsor andtheCitywouldnegotiatethetermsof theCBA.

TheCity’sdraft administrativeguidelinesincludeacommunityfocusgroupfor eachfutureCBAbutthat groupisnot anticipatedtobeat thenegotiatingtable.

TheCity'scurrent proposal lacksparticipationof thecommunityasdirect partnersat thenegotiatingtable. Thisexcludesnot onlycommunityleaders, CBOs, andadvocates, but crucially, thepeoplemost directlyaffectedbytheimpactsof theproject—residents.

Thecommunityneedstohaveadirect roleintheCBAnegotiationprocessalongwiththeCityandtheprojectsponsor, not just limitedtoaninput andfeedbackroleintheprocesswithout anyreal agencyinshapingthesubstantiveoutcomesfor theCBA. Thisisparticularlycritical giventhenebulousbenefitsprovisions.

SIWDhasproposedthat agroupof communitymembersincludingresidents, communitycoalitionmembers, CBOsandother nonprofitsthat servetheimpactedarea, youth,labor, andamember of theRaceEquityCouncil actuallynegotiatetheCBAwiththeCityandthefuturedeveloper.

Enforcementof CBATerms
Theordinanceonlyprovidesthat theCityManager“may” adopt policiesandprocedurestoimplementandenforcetheordinance.

RequireseachCBAtodefineaclassof peoplewhowill bethirdpartybeneficiaryandabletoenforcethepromisesintheCBA.

1. Theordinanceneedsstrongmandatorycommunityenforcement mechanismsandclear accountabilityprocesses.

Theordinancemust requiretheCitytoadopt policiesandprocedurestoimplement theCBAANDengagethecommunityinthedevelopment of thepoliciesandprocedures.

Theordinancedoesnot commit toadoptinganysuchprocesses. Aswritten, it doesnot complywiththesettlement agreement for “atransparent accountabilityprocess” “guidedbyaninclusive, comprehensive,community-drivenprocess.” SIWDhasproposedrobust communityoversight,developer supportedmonitoring, datacollectionandreporting, andenforcement inspiredbytheSt. PetersburgandDetroit CBAordinances.

2. Theordinanceshouldalsorequirethat residentsof theimpactedareaof theproject arealwaysamongthethirdpartybeneficiariestobeincludedineachCBA.

3. Thecurrent ordinancerequiresthedeveloper toindemnifytheCityverybroadly, whichmaybeoverlyburdensomeandimproper dependingonanybenefitsorprovisionstheCityitself hasadutytoprovideor fulfill.

COMMUNITY BENEFIT

COMPARISON
Provided by: Sacramento Investment Without Displacement , April 2023

What is a
Community
Benefits
Ordinance
or Policy
(CBO or
CBP)?
What is it?
◦ An adopted ordinance or policy to systematize and
routinize community benefits
◦ Adopted by a local government and requires community
benefits on projects undertaken by the government and a private developer
Why enact one?
◦ Mitigate negative impacts of significant development on existing residents
◦ Ensure community shares in benefits provided by new
development
◦ Provide continuity in the local planning and development process when leadership changes
◦ Avoid a project-by-project approach that can lead to
inconsistency of scope, concessions, community oversight and enforceability
Effective vs Ineffective Community Benefit
Agreements (CBAs)

INEFFECTIVE CBA EFFECTIVE CBA
Representation
• No community signatories
• Negotiating party or signatory selected by
politician or developer
• Signatory does not have previous CBA
negotiating experience
• Community signatories are independent,
diverse and represent those most
threatened by the impact of the project
• Negotiations led by a well-organized
coalition with strong capacity
• Community signatories have CBA
experience
Effective vs Ineffective CBAs

INEFFECTIVE CBA EFFECTIVE CBA
Transparency, Inclusivity
• Benefit negotiations are:
• Exclusive
• Marked by secrecy
• Rushed
• Robust engagement/outreach process
• Community gets to provide input
throughout the negotiation process
• There are effective mechanisms to ensure
transparency with community
• Benefit negotiations are:
• Transparent
• Inclusive
Effective vs Ineffective CBAs

INEFFECTIVE CBA EFFECTIVE CBA
Community Benefits
• Vague, aspirational terms with few details:
• “good-faith”
• “for consideration”
• “work with”
• Does not address real community needs
• Mobilizing funding with no requirements of
the developer
• Commitments are voluntary
• Detailed, concrete, and measurable terms
• Addresses real community needs
• Benefits include the “asks” of the most
vulnerable members of the impacted
community
• Specific, measurable commitments with
dollar amounts attached
Effective vs Ineffective CBAs

INEFFECTIVE CBA EFFECTIVE CBA
Enforcement
• Limited remedies and injunctive relief
unavailable
• Overly burdensome enforcement and
arbitration process
• Not enforceable against third parties –
contractors and tenants
• Monetary damages and injunctive relief
explicitly available
• Concrete, specific, clearly defined oversight
and reporting process with record keeping
requirements
• Enforceable against third parties and
successors of each party
KICKSTARTER: the conditions a project must meet to warrant a CBA

JURISDICTION KICKSTARTER
City of Detroit
Project value = $75M, and that receives:
- Tax abatements worth $1M, or
- Transfer of city owned land with $1M market value
Project value = $3M project value, and that receives:
- Tax abatements worth $300k+, or
- Transfer of city owned land with a $300K market value.

City of Richmond
Funding from the City = $100k
- Including public financing or contribution such as loan, loan guarantees, tax credits, or infrastructure construction, financial aid, assistance; or Transfer of ownership or lease of right to occupy any city-owned property, including right of way or street vacation, or
Subject to a development agreement.

KICKSTARTER

JURISDICTION KICKSTARTER
Los Angeles County
Public-private project with a projected $10M+ budget or 50,000 sq ft+ floor area.

Excludes affordable housing projects
City of St. Petersburg
Projects that receive public assistance (tax abatements, transfer of city- owned land, monetary contribution, parking fee waiver) greater than 20% of the overall construction cost for projects valued at more than $2 million, or $10 million in public assistance.

JURISDICTION BENEFIT CATEGORY MINIMUM BENEFITS
Los Angeles
County
Local and Target Worker
Hire
30% local hiring requirement for construction
jobs, 10% hiring for targeted workers facing
barriers to employment
Business Enterprise
Program Utilization goal of 25% for LSBEs and 3% goal
for DVBEs
Affordable Housing 20% of any residential units set aside as affordable housing
Monitoring Developer funds a portion of the monitoring
costs during the construction phase
BENEFITS: specific, measurable benefits to offset impacts

BENEFITS

JURISDICTION MINIMUM BENEFITS
City of St. Petersburg
Benefit to the community may include activities in the following areas:
• Affordable or workforce housing
• Environmental resiliency and sustainability
• Public infrastructure
• Equitable workforce development
• Neighborhood health and safety and
• Equitable economic opportunities
City of Richmond
• Make a financial contribution to Community Benefits Fund • Comply with living wage and ban the box ordinances
• Comply with local employment program
• Notify Richmond businesses, Richmond small and nonprofit businesses of construction and operation opportunities

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

JURISDICTION MEETING REQUIREMENT
Los Angeles County 4 public meetings
- Two during pre-development phase, two during development City of St. Petersburg 2 public meetings
- Prior to drafting term sheet, prior to approval of the development agreement City of Detroit 1 public meeting
- Prior to land transfer or tax abatement
CBA NEGOTIATION: Neighborhood Resident Advisory Bodies

JURISDICTION WHO NEGOTIATES CBA BENEFITS
City of Detroit 9-member Neighborhood Advisory Council (NAC) who negotiate project-specific CBAs
City of St. Petersburg
4 members who live within 1 mile of the project (impact area), join the Community Benefit Advisory Council to
negotiate benefits package

OVERSIGHT & ENFORCEMENT

JURISDICTION WHO MONITORS AND ENFORCES CBA
City of St. Petersburg
4 member, standing Community Benefit Advisory Council (CBAC) consults on implementation of the program, and serve 2-to3-year terms.

County of Los Angeles
The County CEO monitors to ensure compliance and releases a scorecard quarterly to track progress of development and benefits.

Health Innovation Community Partnership (HICP) meets monthly to discuss implementation and monitoring.

City of Detroit Enforcement Committee monitors the agreements and provides bi- annual reports on the progress of each benefit. (see following slide) CBO
Biannual
Report
Example
Case Study:

City of
Detroit
Detroit Implementation Outcomes (2020)
10 projects
completed the
negotiation process
Neighborhood
Advisory Councils
(NACs) have secured
168 distinct benefits
for their communities
References
◦ Benjamin S. Beach (2007): Strategies and Lessons from the Los Angeles Community Benefits Experience, Journal of Affordable Housing.
◦ Lisa Berglund (2020): Early Lessons From Detroit’s Community Benefits Ordinance, Journal of American Planning Association. ◦ Lisa Berglund (2021): Democratizing design: possibilities for Detroit’s community benefits ordinance, Journal of Urban Design. ◦ Lisa Berglund & Sam Butler (2021): Detroit’s community benefits ordinance: setbacks and opportunities to giving residents voice in development, Journal of Community Practice.
◦ Susana Bonis, M. Ed., PhD Candidate (2020): Eastside LEADS Building a Movement for Equitable and Accountable Development. ◦ Daniel Kravetz (2017): Fighting for Equity in Development. The Story of Detroit’s Community Benefits Ordinance. ◦ Nicholas J. Marantz (2015): What Do Community Benefits Agreements Deliver? Evidence from Los Angeles. ◦ Julian Gross (2008): Community Benefits Agreements: Definitions, Values, and Legal Enforceability. Journal of Affordable Housing. ◦ Julian Gross, Greg LeRoy, Madeline Janis-Aparicio (2005): Community Benefits Agreements Making Development Projects Accountable.
◦ Partnership for Working Families, Community Benefits Law Center (2016): Common Challenges in Negotiating Community Benefits Agreements and How to Avoid Them.

References
◦ Lee Romney. (2001). Community, Developers Agree on Staples Plan. Los Angeles Times. ◦ Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District Community Benefits Program. LA_DOCS682924.9{W97} ◦ https://www.forworkingfamilies.org/campaigns/CBA
◦ Partnership for Working Families. (2016). Common Challenges in Negotiating Community Benefits Agreements and How to Avoid Them.
◦ Community Benefits Policy for County Economic Development Projects. County of Los Angeles Chief Executive Office.

Adopted June 11, 2019.
◦ Manuel Pastor, Vanessa Carter, Alejandro Sanchez-Lopez, and Robert Chlala. (No Date). Planning, Power, and Possibilities:

How Unidad is Shaping Equitable Development in South Central L.A.

From: Ellen E. Sullivan
To: Ellen E. Sullivan
Subject: FW: Action Required!
Date: Thursday, April 13, 2023 8:40:20 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
From: Michelle Willard <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2023 4:57 PM
To: Ellen E. Sullivan <[email protected]> Cc: Matthew Miller <[email protected]>; Barry Broome <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Action Required!

Hi Ellen,

Please see below our President & CEO Barry Broome’s comments for Tuesday. Please let me know if you have any questions.

As President & CEO of the Greater Sacramento Economic Council (GSEC), I strongly oppose the draft Community Benefits Agreement. GSEC is a public-private partnership comprised of 40+ CEOs and 21 communities with the mission of driving economic growth throughout the six-county Greater Sacramento region. While jobs are essential to economic growth, our goal is to increase prosperity and equity – this agreement would work against these goals by reducing investment and job creation in the community, ultimately hurting low income and underserved communities the most.

A Community Benefits Agreement for all large development projects moving forward is detrimental to economic growth. Our community already relies too heavily on government jobs – Greater Sacramento is 79% more dependent on government jobs than its peers and has more government jobs than Washington DC. Industry diversity is critical to building an inclusive economy, especially for our underserved communities. To build a diverse economy, we must foster growth.

The creation of this Community Benefits Agreement lacked transparency and will hinder inclusive economic growth. We are increasingly concerned with the lack of transparency and consistency on such critical economic decisions. I strongly urge the Law and Legislation Committee to amend the Community Benefits Agreement and prioritize inclusive growth in Greater Sacramento.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Barry Broome
President & CEO
Greater Sacramento Economic Council

Greater Sacramento is undergoing unprecedented growth. See what’s driving our momentum.

From: Ellen E. Sullivan
To: Ellen E. Sullivan
Subject: FW: Action Required!
Date: Thursday, April 13, 2023 8:49:21 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png

From: Michelle Willard <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2023 3:29 PM
To: Ellen E. Sullivan <[email protected]> Cc: Matthew Miller <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Action Required!

Hi Ellen,

Public comments below. Let me know if you have any questions. Our President & CEO, Barry Broome will be speaking as well. I’ll send his comments shortly.

My name is Michelle Willard. I’m the Chief Public Affairs Officer for the Greater Sacramento Economic Council. We are the leading economic development organization for the Sacramento, six-county region, and a public/private nonprofit organization with more than 40 CEOs and 21 communities focusing on growth, prosperity, equity, and inclusion as it relates to economic development. We do not support the draft Community Benefits Agreement that is currently being proposed. When we prevent development and reduce investment in the community it ultimately hurts job creation for low income and underserved communities. We need a vibrant downtown; additional housing and this policy will make it uneconomical to do that. There is already a significant lack of developers willing to even develop in our community. The urban core is in decline as more people have moved away to the suburbs from COVID-19. We should amend the CBA in our urban core, specifically for the Railyards and Riverfront development.

We are a community already heavily reliant on government jobs. Greater Sacramento is 79% more dependent on government jobs than its peers and has more government jobs than Washington DC.

This does not provide an inclusive economy for our community, especially for our underserved communities. We are asking the law and legislative committee to amend the agreement. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you.

Best,
Michelle

Greater Sacramento is undergoing unprecedented growth. See what’s driving our momentum.

Law and Legislation CommitteeApril 18, 2023

Law and Legislation Committee
April 18, 2023