Palmer Fix Introduced

US Supreme Court Declines Review of San Jose’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
February 29, 2016
Housing advocates lift up real policy solutions for regional planning agencies
March 2, 2016

On February 19th, a new “Palmer Fix” bill, AB 2502 (Mullin and Chiu), was introduced to clarify that local jurisdictions may require, as a condition of approval, inclusion of affordable units in a multi-family residential development. Read the full text of AB 2502 here and find a support letter template hereThis bill is cosponsored by NPH along with our partners, Western Center on Law & Poverty and the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation.


The ability of jurisdictions to implement inclusionary requirements for rental housing was adversely impacted in 2009 with the California Appellate Court ruling in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (Palmer), which found that rental inclusionary requirements conflict with the prohibition on setting initial rents imposed by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995.


In 2013, Governor Brown vetoed  a previous “Palmer Fix” bill, AB 1229 (Atkins), because, at that time, the legality of inclusionary housing programs for for-sale housing development was being considered by the California Supreme Court in the CBIA v. City of San Jose case. In his veto message, Governor Brown indicated that he wanted to await the court’s decision in that case before taking any action to clarify the law. With the California Supreme Court unanimously upholding inclusionary housing last June and yesterday’s action by SCOTUS, the Governor’s rationale for vetoing a “Palmer Fix” bill has been completely removed.


NPH will now work diligently with our partners and allies to put AB 2502 (Mullin and Chiu) on Governor Brown’s desk for his signature. #PalmerFixNow