Laserfiche WebLink
Jonathan Lowell, Esq. <br /> February 15,2012 <br /> 1 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> B. Commitment to Promote Affordable Housing. <br /> Exhibit C to the Settlement Agreement is Resolution 10-390,which the Council adopted as part <br /> of the Settlement. Section I of the Resolution states that <br /> City staff and the City Council will act affirmatively to promote the development of well- <br /> designed affordable housing for families with children in Pleasanton.The City Manager <br /> will report regularly to the City Council on the City's efforts to fulfill this policy, the <br /> success of those efforts,and plans and proposals to attract well-designed affordable <br /> housing for families with children in the future. <br /> The Resolution is incorporated into the Settlement Agreement(§ 5.1),which goes on to provide <br /> that the City will implement provisions of the Resolution in connection with its Housing Element <br /> update. (§ 6.5.)These obligations, including the obligation to permit stand-alone affordable <br /> housing development,are consistent with the provision of California law that prohibits cities <br /> from discriminating against affordable housing development. (Gov. Code § 65008(d)(I).) <br /> Policy 37 of Pleasanton's updated Housing Element is in violation of these provisions. It sets out <br /> the City's intention to"Disperse housing units affordable to extremely-low-, low- and very-low- <br /> income households throughout new residential developments." Although it goes on to state that <br /> this should be done"consistent with City Resolution No. 10-390,"the actual policy language <br /> does not comply with the City's settlement obligations. As we brought to the City's attention <br /> over a year ago (see Letter from Christopher Mooney to Jonathan Lowell, dated November 10, <br /> 2012),the requirement to"disperse" affordable units can be(and has been) interpreted to <br /> discourage or even prohibit stand-alone affordable development in violation of Gov. Code § <br /> 65008(d),especially when incorporated as a binding Policy of the City's Housing Element. <br /> Policy 37 must be revised to reflect the City's commitment in Resolution No. 10-390 to promote <br /> affordable housing development and not to discriminate against any affordable housing <br /> development regardless of the mix of incomes in the development. <br /> C. Remedies. <br /> As you know, we have made repeated efforts to resolve these and other issues since the draft <br /> Housing Element was issued last August.' The Council's failure to complete the site rezoning by <br /> the February 13 deadline, and to amend portions of the Housing Element to meet the city's legal <br /> obligations, now requires us to invoke Section 12.3 of the Agreement.That Section provides: <br /> In the event that any Party believes that another Party is in breach of any of the terms set <br /> forth in this Settlement Agreement,that Party asserting a breach shall give written notice <br /> to the other Party of the breach and the Parties shall meet and confer within fourteen (14) <br /> business days of such notice before any party seeks judicial enforcement. <br /> If these issues are not promptly resolved through negotiation, and the intervention of the Court <br /> becomes necessary, we will ask the Court to re-impose its injunction on the City's authority to <br /> We first spoke with you about these issues on September 16, and continued discussing these <br /> issues with you in person or by phone on at least five subsequent occasions, including November 10 and <br /> 23, December 19,January 11,and February 13. <br />