Photo courtesy of Live Oak City

LIVE OAK, CA (MPG) - Live Oak City Council considered a letter of opposition to the proposed California Senate Bill 79 (SB 79) during its May 7 meeting.

Interim City Manager Kary Hauck said that the bill “seeks to grant limited land use authority to transit agencies on properties they own or which they hold permanent easements.” If Senate Bill 79 is approved, Hauck said, transit agencies could approve developments without regard for local policies on building height, density, design or zoning codes.

“The proposed legislation would strip cities and counties of the ability to regulate land use on affected properties, override local general plans that have been carefully developed to balance community needs and growth, disregard the extensive public process required for local housing element certifications, and applied broadly to both residential and commercial developments, not just transit-oriented projects,” said Hauck. “This blanket authority ignores the distinct needs, infrastructure capabilities and planning goals of smaller rural communities.”

Councilmember Bob Woten said it was important for council to oppose this bill because Live Oak should retain as much local control as possible. City Council voted unanimously to submit the letter of opposition.

The council then discussed a potential $57,000 contract with PlaceWorks to complete Live Oak’s sixth Cycle Housing Element, a document outlining the city’s compliance with California housing policies. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) requires an updated Housing Element every eight years and this round should have been completed back in 2021.

The city originally contracted with Raney and Associates, which had worked on the updated housing element for several years. However, after various delays, the consultants withdrew from the project in April. Interim City Manager Hauck said that Housing and Community Development has granted the city a brief extension and staff recommended PlaceWorks complete the update and obtain state certification.

Councilmember Nancy Santana asked why the city was considering this contract when “supposably, we don’t have much money.”

Councilmember Ashley Hernandez clarified that this update is a state requirement, not something extra the city is electing to do.

Without an updated and certified housing element, associate planner Laura Stewart said, the city is ineligible for many grant funding sources, including community development block grants, infill infrastructure grants, local housing trust fund programs, affordable housing and sustainable communities’ grants, permanent local housing allocation programs and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) grants.

Santana asked why the city is now required to do this update when it didn’t previously do it. Stewart clarified that the city has been out of compliance since 2021 and added, “We’ve always had to do it. It’s been in progress.”

PlaceWorks Principal Jennifer Gastelum said, “You guys are in a predicament here.” The housing element is a challenging document to complete because the state often takes 60 days to respond to a submission and there could be new housing policies during that time to include, she said. Gastelum also said she has “a good working relationship” with Housing and Community Development and her specialty “is stepping into problem situations” and getting the certification.

One reason that the city’s housing element submission hadn’t previously been approved, Gastelum said, was because the current document doesn’t show that Live Oak has enough residential land to accommodate future growth. She told City Council that one aspect of the update might include rezoning certain land uses to increase the allowable housing density. While she clarified that the city doesn’t have to construct the housing, the city needs to have policies that facilitate various housing densities and identify fair housing practices.

City Council voted unanimously to approve the new contract with PlaceWorks.

The city is in the process of undertaking a potential water rate increase since the water fund has been operating at a deficit for many years. Because water rates have not been raised in approximately 20 years, the current rates are insufficient to cover operational costs and infrastructure maintenance.

As a possible alternative option, Interim City Manager Hauck suggested that the city consider divesting the operations to a private utility company, which would assume full operation and management of the water and sewer systems.

The city could issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) from interested water agencies, which Hauck said would give City Council an idea of how the privatization process works so council could make an informed decision. The Request for Proposals would be an exploratory process and the city would not be obligated to enter a contract.

Councilmember Hernandez said it’s important for councilmembers to have multiple options so they can make informed decisions.

Mayor Jeramy Chapdelaine said, “It’s clear we’re really out of time in regard to acting on this. There’s been far too much inaction… We have some hard decisions to make ahead of us, and I think it’s great to be able to see the big picture and share that info and get it out there.”

During Public Comment, Shannon McGovern, a representative of the private water company CalWater, said she would like an opportunity to speak at a future meeting to provide details about the services they offer.

One resident said he would like to see a comparison between the possible rate increases and potential water costs through a private company. Hauck explained that those numbers would be available after companies had submitted responses to a Request for Proposal.

Another resident said, “In the long run, I would really hate to turn over control of our local water and sewer to a private entity.” Unlike the city’s water fund, he said, a private company would be driven by profits, which could mean higher costs for the customers. He supported the rate increase, because “it’s going to be less in the long run than what CalWater’s going to charge us.”

City Council voted unanimously to direct staff to release a Request for Proposal.

The next Live Oak City Council meeting is on May 21.