Sacramento City Council on June 9 reviewed the annual reports for the city’s main affordable housing programs — a once-a-year check-in that tells residents how much money is flowing into affordable housing and how many units it is producing. The package covered the Housing Trust Fund Ordinance (a local law that charges fees on new commercial development and steers the money toward affordable apartments), the Mixed-Income Housing Ordinance (the rule requiring market-rate housing projects to either include affordable units or pay an in-lieu fee), the federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program (a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development grant the city uses for affordable rental and homebuyer projects), the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (state housing dollars distributed by formula each year), the State Local Housing Trust Fund, and the Residential Hotel Unit Withdrawal and Conversion ordinance (the local protection that limits when single-room-occupancy hotels — often the cheapest housing in the city — can be torn down or converted to other uses).
For renters and prospective buyers, these reports matter because they show whether the fees collected from developers and the grants drawn down from Washington and Sacramento are actually translating into below-market apartments, down-payment help, and preservation of low-cost housing stock. The annual reporting is required by each ordinance, and the council’s acceptance keeps the programs in compliance and the funding pipelines open for the coming year.
In the same meeting, the council approved amendments to the Conflict of Interest Code for the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency (SHRA) — the joint city-county agency that runs public housing, Section 8 rental vouchers, and most affordable housing financing in Sacramento. The Conflict of Interest Code is the ethics rulebook that spells out which SHRA staff and board members must publicly disclose their personal finances to guard against self-dealing. State law requires every local agency to review the code every two years, and the update mainly refreshes the list of covered job titles. It does not change any housing program or funding level, but it keeps the agency’s decisions on housing contracts legally defensible.
On June 11, the Planning and Design Commission took up a Planned Unit Development amendment for Deer Creek Plaza (file P25-020) — a request to change the adopted master plan for the site. A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a custom zoning package that sets the rules — building heights, uses, setbacks, and design standards — for one specific project area, replacing the city’s standard zoning. Amending it means the developer wants to tweak what was previously approved. The item has been re-noticed multiple times since March, signaling either revisions to the proposal or scheduling delays. For neighbors, a PUD amendment is the main chance to weigh in on what ultimately gets built on the site.
What’s coming up: The Deer Creek Plaza amendment remains before the Planning and Design Commission and could return for further hearings depending on the commission’s direction. Residents tracking the annual housing reports can expect specific funding allocations — including new Notices of Funding Availability for affordable developers — to come back to the council later in the summer.