Today, the California Supreme Court has upheld the City of San Jose’s inclusionary ordinance that requires developers of new residential projects with more than 20 units to make 15 percent of on-site units available for purchase to lower-income households or provide in-lieu fees or dedicate land to create affordable homes. This decision comes against a legal challenge brought by the California Building Industry Association.
“Inclusionary ordinances are one of the most critical tools to promote affordable housing and ensure vibrant, mixed-income communities,” said San Diego Housing Federation’s Executive Director Bruce Reznik. “We welcome the California Supreme Court’s resolution of this important issue affirming the authority of cities to adopt inclusionary ordinances to address the state’s critical housing crisis.”
Specifically, the California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal’s holding that the San Jose ordinance falls under the “well-established principle that under the California Constitution a municipality has broad authority, under its general police power, to regulate the development and use of real property within its jurisdiction to promote the public welfare,” and does not therefore constitute a taking or other abuse of authority.
Reznik says the case was closely watched as there have been several contradictory rulings over the past decade that has created significant confusion regarding how inclusionary zoning and housing ordinances should be interpreted. Statewide, more than 170 California municipalities have adopted some type of “inclusionary zoning” ordinance.
In San Diego County, 10 cities have some type of inclusionary ordinance, though they vary in scope and specific requirements. Inclusionary ordinances have resulted in the development of thousands of affordable homes throughout the region, either directly or through the payment of in-lieu fees that support the financing of affordable housing development. Many local jurisdictions have been waiting for the resolution of this case as they consider whether to update existing or adopt new inclusionary ordinances.
“With residential development in the region starting to increase as our economy recovers, this is an important time to recognize the legitimacy and importance of inclusionary ordinances and provide local officials with the certainty they need to move ahead with such programs,” said Reznik.
The Housing Federation says that inclusionary programs are an important tool to achieving balanced and diverse communities by ensuring that affordable developments are dispersed throughout the region rather than centered in a few communities. They enable working families to be closer to job centers, and they enable families with children to take advantage of better educational opportunities that often are present in high housing cost areas. They provide a range of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the population, including households of lower and moderate income. Without inclusionary requirements, many communities can become islands of high income, single family homes, lacking the diversity important to thriving live-work metropolitan areas.
A coalition of affordable housing advocates – including San Diego Housing Federation – and a low-income resident intervened as parties to the case and participated in oral arguments at the California Supreme Court in support of the City of San Jose. California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris filed an Amicus Curiae (‘friend of the court’) brief in support of the ordinance.
