An act to amend Section 4051 of the Food and Agricultural Code, relating to district agricultural associations.
AB 2264 would expand the authority of district agricultural associations, including California fairgrounds, to use their real property for affordable housing development. Under the bill, those associations could explicitly purchase, hold, sell, exchange, convey, and lease property for the construction and maintenance of affordable housing and housing affordable to persons and families of low or moderate income, subject to approval by the Department of General Services. The bill also extends the maximum lease term for such uses from 55 years to 99 years, which is intended to make long-term housing projects more feasible on association-owned land.
The bill adds affordability safeguards for any housing developed on association property. It requires recorded deed restrictions ensuring that, for at least 55 years, 100% of the units, aside from manager units, remain affordable to low- or moderate-income households at affordable rents. It also makes clear that existing state restrictions related to farmworker housing funding and H-2A employers apply to these transactions and to any funds, subsidies, or real property involved. In effect, AB 2264 creates a framework for fairgrounds and similar district agricultural association lands to be used as a source of long-term affordable housing while preserving affordability and limiting certain state-funded housing uses.
AB 2264 would amend Section 4051 of the Food and Agricultural Code to expressly authorize district agricultural associations to participate in affordable housing development and leasing on their property. It would lengthen permissible lease terms to 99 years for housing projects, require deed-restricted affordability for at least 55 years, and apply specified Health and Safety Code affordability provisions to these transactions. The bill would also tie these projects to existing prohibitions involving state housing funds and H-2A employers, and it would create a state-mandated local program by making violations of the Food and Agricultural Code potentially criminal, though the bill states no reimbursement is required.
The available vote history suggests generally favorable committee sentiment. The bill passed the first committee vote 8-0 and the second 12-0, including a recommendation to the consent calendar, indicating broad support and little visible opposition at those stages. However, the bill was later held under submission in committee, which suggests that despite positive votes, it did not advance immediately and may have faced procedural or fiscal review concerns.
The main policy issue appears to be whether district agricultural associations and fairgrounds should be used for housing development, and under what constraints. Support is implied by the unanimous committee votes and the bill’s housing-production purpose, while potential concerns likely center on land-use changes, the long 99-year lease term, the interaction with state housing subsidy restrictions, and the bill’s criminal penalty language. The requirement that 100% of units remain income-restricted for 55 years may also be a point of scrutiny for feasibility and enforcement, especially for projects on public or quasi-public fairground property.