Santa Barbara County Seeks ‘Prohousing’ Designation from State

Designation Would Increase Funding Opportunities for Projects but Could Limit Local Control

Pictured from left, supervisors Joan Hartmann, Roy Lee, and Laura Capps approved an application for the California Department of Housing’s Prohousing Designation Program at their May 20 meeting. | Credit: Ingrid Bostrom File Photo

This podcast was underwritten in part by the Mickey Flacks Journalism Fund for Social Justice, a proud and innovative supporter of local news. To make a contribution, go to sbcan.org/journalism_fund. To sponsor The Indy, contact advertising@independent.com.

What does it mean to be “prohousing”? For Santa Barbara County, it includes applying for a state designation that would increase funding opportunities for local housing and infrastructure projects but could limit local control on development policies. On Tuesday, the county’s Board of Supervisors approved an application for the California Department of Housing’s Prohousing Designation Program. Supervisors Laura Capps, Joan Hartmann, and Roy Lee formed the May 20 board, and all voted “yes.”

In a presentation to the supervisors, Lucille Boss, the county’s housing programs manager, said the program would adhere to the 2023 Housing Element update; the county says there will be no changes as a direct result of this designation.

“Both the state and local level recognize the current housing crisis, and this program is an effort to address the crisis,” Boss said.

The program, established as part of the 2019/20 Budget Act, offers counties that “go above-and-beyond state housing law to help accelerate housing production” the ability to apply for the state’s Prohousing Incentive Program, which has set aside $56 million for cities and counties with the designation since 2023. Prohousing communities can also receive priority processing and funding points that make them more competitive for other housing and infrastructure grants.

The application for the designation contains four categories: Favorable Zoning and Land Use, Acceleration of Housing Production Timeframes, Reduction of Construction and Development Costs, and Providing Financial Subsidies. Each category has a list of actions the county can take to be considered for the designation. The county obtains the designation by demonstrating they have done, or plan to do actions in each category. Each action is worth one, two, or three points. In total, the county needs a score of 30 points, as well as at least one policy that ‘significantly contributes’ to increasing housing production in each category.

But the designation requires the county to maintain a prohousing stance. That includes taking on administrative costs for monitoring and evaluating the county’s success in meeting the designation’s requirements. The County said that State funding generally allows 5% of an award to go toward administration, which could help offset costs.

It also means possibly limiting the local government’s ability to put in place laws or policies that could curb housing production. State requirements say that moratoriums on development, local voter approval requirements for housing, and development standards or permit procedures could all fall under the “inhibit housing construction” umbrella.

Currently, 40 cities and six counties have this designation.

Public comment for the designation was largely supportive, but with concern that the program does not provide enough funding for affordable housing; commenters asked that the county establish a local funding source for affordable housing.

Further, during public comment the Board of the Citizens Planning Association suggested the county pursue funding, but not seek to further streamline the housing application process, citing bills proposed in the state legislature that aim to limit the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluation process, which could fast-track more projects. Last week, Governor Newsom endorsed two housing bills that would limit the role of CEQA in some projects. Assembly Bill 609 would make most infill housing projects — that’s projects on lots in established urban areas. Senate Bill 607 would make it easier for the state and local governments to approve projects without a full CEQA review.

At the vote, Supervisor Hartmann asked the staff to “give additional scrutiny” to the questions raised about funding and CEQA, to which county staff agreed. The county intends to make minor revisions and submit the application in the next couple of weeks.