Editorial: County housing retreat?

Sacramento County's landmark affordable housing law is under attack, and the real threat isn't the court system, but a new majority on the Board of Supervisors.

In 2004, under the lead of long-time Supervisor Illa Collin, the board enacted a requirement that calls for 15 percent of any new development to have units for people at the lower ranges of the income spectrum. The building industry opposed the measure, challenged it in court and lost on every count. But with Collin gone and Supervisor Jimmie Yee (backed heavily by the building industry) on the board, suddenly the county is privately negotiating with the builders and leaving affordable housing advocates in the dark.

This ordinance is the product of a very long and very public process. If Yee and a new board majority (Susan Peters and Roberta MacGlashan) want to build less affordable housing, let's have an open process that debates the issue in public. Stop using a flimsy lawsuit as an excuse.

Ordinances like this are admittedly an imperfect tool for local governments to try to create balanced communities. But until there is a broader, better statewide fix that creates the market conditions necessary to build all kinds of housing, local leaders have little choice.

The Sacramento County ordinance isn't fundamentally different from many throughout the state. The developer either builds the units or sets aside land and pays a fee to get out of the requirement. What is somewhat unique about the county requirement is how it addresses the needs of the poorest of the poor, those in the "extremely low" income category who need housing. Three percent of all housing units need to be for extremely low-income residents.

The ordinance certainly hasn't stopped growth in the county. More than 200 projects to build 32,000 new homes, condominiums and apartments have been proposed since its inception in January 2005.

The Northern California Building Industry Association views affordable housing as somebody else's problem, but that argument got nowhere before Judge Loren McMaster in Sacramento Superior Court. The builders appealed the case. And a hearing this month was delayed until September for private settlement talks.

This battle is significant enough to attract the help of the California attorney general. There is no evident reason for the county to settle a case it is so clearly winning. If a shift in the political makeup of the board is the force behind the drive to revisit this ordinance, supervisors should do so within the regular deliberative process, one that is very public and very inclusive. Yee and the rest of the board need to hear from the majority of citizens out there who prefer open debate and not backroom deals.