Bill Text

Bill Information

PDF |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | print page

SB-166 Residential density and affordability.(2017-2018)

SHARE THIS:share this bill in Facebookshare this bill in Twitter
Date Published: 03/01/2017 09:00 PM
SB166:v98#DOCUMENT

Amended  IN  Senate  March 01, 2017

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2017–2018 REGULAR SESSION

Senate Bill No. 166


Introduced by Senator Skinner

January 23, 2017


An act to amend and repeal Section 4055 of the Family Code, relating to child support. An act to amend Section 65863 of the Government Code, relating to land use.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


SB 166, as amended, Skinner. Child support guideline: low-income adjustment. Residential density and affordability.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city, county, or city and county to ensure that its housing element inventory, as described, can accommodate its share of the regional housing need throughout the planning period. The law also prohibits a city, county, or city and county from reducing, requiring, or permitting the reduction of the residential density to a lower residential density that is below the density that was utilized by the Department of Housing and Community Development in determining compliance with housing element law, unless the city, county, or city and county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence that the reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element, and that the remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need. The city, county, or city and county may reduce the residential density for a parcel if it identifies sufficient sites, as prescribed, so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity.
This bill, among other things, would prohibit a city, county, or city and county from permitting or causing its inventory of sites identified in the housing element to be insufficient to meet its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need for lower and moderate-income households. The bill also would expand the definition of “lower residential density” if the local jurisdiction has not adopted a housing element for the current planning period or the adopted housing element is not in substantial compliance, as specified. This bill would also condition the approval or development containing fewer housing units at each income level than its identified capacity upon identifying sufficient sites or rezones, as prescribed, to ensure no net loss of residential unit capacity. By increasing the duties of local agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law imposes a general obligation on both parents of a minor child to support their child in the manner suitable to the child’s circumstances. Existing law establishes the statewide uniform guidelines for calculating court-ordered child support, based on the income of both parents and the time each parent spends with the child. Existing law establishes a rebuttable presumption that an obligor with a net disposable income, as defined, of a specified amount per month is entitled to a low-income adjustment to his or her child support obligation. The net disposable income threshold, until January 1, 2018, is $1,500 per month, adjusted annually for cost-of-living increases. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to determine the adjustment amount based on the change in the annual California Consumer Price Index, as specified. The net disposable income threshold, commencing January 1, 2018, is $1,000 per month without an annual adjustment for cost-of-living increases.

This bill would delete the January 1, 2018, sunset date, thereby maintaining the net disposable income threshold at $1,500 per month, adjusted annually for cost-of-living increases, indefinitely, and would repeal the provision that becomes operative on January 1, 2018.

Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: NOYES  

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:


SECTION 1.

 Section 65863 of the Government Code is amended to read:

65863.
 (a) Each city, county, or city and county shall ensure that its housing element inventory described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 or its housing element program to make sites available pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583 can accommodate accommodate, at all times throughout the planning period, its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need allocated pursuant to Section 65584, throughout 65584. At no time shall a city, county, or city and county by administrative, quasi-judicial, legislative, or other action permit or cause its inventory of sites identified in the planning period. housing element to be insufficient to meet its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need for lower and moderate-income households.
(b) No city, county, or city and county shall, by administrative, quasi-judicial, legislative, or other action, reduce, or require or permit the reduction of, the residential density for any parcel to, or allow development of any parcel at, a lower residential density, as defined in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (g), unless the city, county, or city and county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence of both of the following:
(1) The reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element.
(2) The remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584.
(c) If a reduction in residential density for any parcel or approval of a development containing fewer than the number of units at each income level identified in the housing element as the realistic capacity of the site would result in the remaining sites in the housing element not being adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need at each income level pursuant to Section 65584, the jurisdiction may reduce the density on that parcel or approve a development proposal only if it identifies identifies, and rezones if necessary to render the site adequate, sufficient additional, adequate, and available sites with an equal or greater residential density in the jurisdiction so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity. capacity at each income level. Any rezoning of an additional site required by this subdivision shall be completed prior to, or contemporaneous with, the reduction of density of the parcel or approval of the development.
(d) The requirements of this section shall be in addition to any other law that may restrict or limit the reduction of residential density.
(e) This section requires that a city, county, or city and county be solely responsible for compliance with this section, unless a project applicant requests in his or her initial application, as submitted, a density that would result in the remaining sites in the housing element not being adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584. In that case, the city, county, or city and county may require the project applicant to comply with this section. The submission of an application for purposes of this subdivision does not depend on the application being deemed complete or being accepted by the city, county, or city and county.
(f) This section shall not be construed to apply to parcels that, prior to January 1, 2003, were either (1) subject to a development agreement, or (2) parcels for which an application for a subdivision map had been submitted.
(g) (1) If the local jurisdiction has adopted a housing element for the current planning period that is in substantial compliance with Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3, for purposes of this section, “lower residential density” means the following:
(A) For sites on which the zoning designation permits residential use and that are identified in the local jurisdiction’s housing element inventory described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, fewer units on the site than were projected by the jurisdiction to be accommodated on the site pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2.
(B) For sites that have been or will be rezoned pursuant to the local jurisdiction’s housing element program described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583, fewer units for the site than were projected to be developed on the site in the housing element program.
(2) (A) If the local jurisdiction has not adopted a housing element for the current planning period within 90 days of the deadline established by Section 65588 or the adopted housing element is not in substantial compliance with Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 within 180 days of the deadline established by Section 65588, “lower residential density” means any of the following:
(i) For residentially zoned sites, a density that is lower than 80 percent of the maximum allowable residential density for that parcel. parcel or 80 percent of the maximum density required by paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, whichever is greater.
(ii) For sites on which residential and nonresidential uses are permitted, a use that would result in the development of fewer than 80 percent of the number of residential units that would be allowed under the maximum residential density for the site. site parcel or 80 percent of the maximum density required by paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, whichever is greater.
(B) If the council of governments fails to complete a final housing need allocation pursuant to the deadlines established by Section 65584.05, then for purposes of this paragraph, the deadline pursuant to Section 65588 shall be extended by a time period equal to the number of days of delay incurred by the council of governments in completing the final housing need allocation.

SEC. 2.

 No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.
SECTION 1.Section 4055 of the Family Code, as amended by Section 61 of Chapter 76 of the Statutes of 2013, is amended to read:
4055.

(a)The statewide uniform guideline for determining child support orders is as follows: CS = K[HN - (H%)(TN)].

(b)(1)The components of the formula are as follows:

(A)CS = child support amount.

(B)K = amount of both parents’ income to be allocated for child support as set forth in paragraph (3).

(C)HN = high earner’s net monthly disposable income.

(D)H% = approximate percentage of time that the high earner has or will have primary physical responsibility for the children compared to the other parent. In cases in which parents have different time-sharing arrangements for different children, H% equals the average of the approximate percentages of time the high earner parent spends with each child.

(E)TN = total net monthly disposable income of both parties.

(2)To compute net disposable income, see Section 4059.

(3)K (amount of both parents’ income allocated for child support) equals one plus H% (if H% is less than or equal to 50 percent) or two minus H% (if H% is greater than 50 percent) times the following fraction:

Total Net Disposable
Income Per Month

K

$0–800

0.20 + TN/16,000

$801–6,666

0.25

$6,667–10,000

0.10 + 1,000/TN

Over $10,000

0.12 + 800/TN

For example, if H% equals 20 percent and the total monthly net disposable income of the parents is $1,000, K = (1 + 0.20) × 0.25, or 0.30. If H% equals 80 percent and the total monthly net disposable income of the parents is $1,000, K = (2 - 0.80) × 0.25, or 0.30.

(4)For more than one child, multiply CS by:

2 children

1.6

3 children

2

4 children

2.3

5 children

2.5

6 children

2.625

7 children

2.75

8 children

2.813

9 children

2.844

10 children

2.86

(5)If the amount calculated under the formula results in a positive number, the higher earner shall pay that amount to the lower earner. If the amount calculated under the formula results in a negative number, the lower earner shall pay the absolute value of that amount to the higher earner.

(6)In any default proceeding where proof is by affidavit pursuant to Section 2336, or in any proceeding for child support in which a party fails to appear after being duly noticed, H% shall be set at zero in the formula if the noncustodial parent is the higher earner or at 100 if the custodial parent is the higher earner, where there is no evidence presented demonstrating the percentage of time that the noncustodial parent has primary physical responsibility for the children. H% shall not be set as described above if the moving party in a default proceeding is the noncustodial parent or if the party who fails to appear after being duly noticed is the custodial parent. A statement by the party who is not in default as to the percentage of time that the noncustodial parent has primary physical responsibility for the children shall be deemed sufficient evidence.

(7)In all cases in which the net disposable income per month of the obligor is less than one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500), adjusted annually for cost-of-living increases, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the obligor is entitled to a low-income adjustment. On March 1, 2013, and annually thereafter, the Judicial Council shall determine the amount of the net disposable income adjustment based on the change in the annual California Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, published by the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Statistics and Research. The presumption may be rebutted by evidence showing that the application of the low-income adjustment would be unjust and inappropriate in the particular case. In determining whether the presumption is rebutted, the court shall consider the principles provided in Section 4053, and the impact of the contemplated adjustment on the respective net incomes of the obligor and the obligee. The low-income adjustment shall reduce the child support amount otherwise determined under this section by an amount that is no greater than the amount calculated by multiplying the child support amount otherwise determined under this section by a fraction, the numerator of which is 1,500 minus the obligor’s net disposable income per month, and the denominator of which is 1,500.

(8)Unless the court orders otherwise, the order for child support shall allocate the support amount so that the amount of support for the youngest child is the amount of support for one child, and the amount for the next youngest child is the difference between that amount and the amount for two children, with similar allocations for additional children. However, this paragraph does not apply to cases in which there are different time-sharing arrangements for different children or where the court determines that the allocation would be inappropriate in the particular case.

(c)If a court uses a computer to calculate the child support order, the computer program shall not automatically default affirmatively or negatively on whether a low-income adjustment is to be applied. If the low-income adjustment is applied, the computer program shall not provide the amount of the low-income adjustment. Instead, the computer program shall ask the user whether or not to apply the low-income adjustment, and if answered affirmatively, the computer program shall provide the range of the adjustment permitted by paragraph (7) of subdivision (b).

SEC. 2.Section 4055 of the Family Code, as amended by Section 62 of Chapter 76 of the Statutes of 2013, is repealed.