(SACRAMENTO, CA.) — The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors delayed a decision on July 14 whether to expand its Affordable Housing Impact Fee Offset Program after several supervisors raised concerns about continuing to use General Fund dollars to subsidize affordable housing projects while the county faces mounting budget pressures.
Although no vote was taken, the discussion highlighted differing views over how aggressively the county should continue supporting affordable housing development as officials work to address broader fiscal challenges.
The proposal would not appropriate additional funding. Instead, it would expand how the approximately $2.8 million remaining in the county's existing three-year Affordable Housing Impact Fee Offset Program may be used by allowing qualifying affordable housing developments to offset eligible park district impact fees in addition to county-controlled development impact fees.
Development impact fees are charged to help pay for public infrastructure needed to support new development, including roads, parks and other public facilities.
According to a county staff report, the expansion would apply only to three park districts governed by the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors: the Carmichael Recreation and Park District, Mission Oaks Recreation and Park District, and the unincorporated portion of the Sunrise Recreation and Park District. Staff said the change would not reduce funding available to those districts because the fees would still be paid, but from the county's existing offset program rather than directly by affordable housing developers.
(Credit: Supervisor Rosario Rodriquez questioned whether expanding the Affordable Housing Impact Fee Offset Program was appropriate given the county's fiscal outlook. Board of Supervisor’s Meeting, Metro Cable 14 YouTube video.)
Supervisor Rosario Rodriquez of District 4 said her concerns centered less on affordable housing than on whether the county could continue using scarce General Fund resources to subsidize development projects.
"I understand we want to help promote affordable housing projects," Rodriquez said. "I'm very supportive of affordable housing projects and all housing in Sacramento. But today, I am challenged by this $5 million coming out of the General Fund when we have so many other challenges throughout our budget."
Rodriquez noted the Board was scheduled later that day to continue discussions on the county's broader fiscal outlook, saying those budget realities made it appropriate to reconsider whether General Fund dollars should continue supporting private development incentives.
(County Engineer Claudia Wade at the Board of Supervisor’s Meeting. Credit: Metro Cable 14 YouTube video.)
County Engineer Claudia Wade explained the Impact Fee Offset Program was originally established with $10 million in funding, including $5 million from the General Fund and $5 million from the Housing Trust Fund, with approximately $2.8 million still available. Staff emphasized the proposal would not create a new funding program or increase the amount of money available. Instead, it would expand the eligible uses of the remaining funds to include certain park district impact fees.
Staff also noted that five other park districts are independently governed and could not be included without approval from their respective boards. County officials said they may return with a future proposal if those districts choose to participate.
The discussion reflects a broader policy debate facing Sacramento County as officials attempt to balance investments in affordable housing with mounting fiscal pressures and competing demands on the General Fund. While supervisors broadly expressed support for affordable housing construction, Desmond questioned whether subsidizing development projects should remain a priority as the county confronts budget challenges.
The proposal was introduced on July 14 and, consistent with the county's agenda, was continued to the Board's July 28 meeting for adoption. Before moving the item forward, however, Supervisor Rodriquez pulled it from the consent calendar to question whether expanding the program was appropriate given the county's fiscal outlook. Supervisor Pat Hume also registered a "no" vote on the item, aligning himself with Desmond's concerns.
If you’d like to add or correct anything in this report, feel free to reach out to me or leave a comment below. Submit Sacramento County tips and story ideas to Sarah Denos at sarahkdenos@gmail.com.
0
0
Comments