Measure B
In 1986, Dixon voters approved a Residential Growth Implementation Plan Initiative, known as Measure B. Dixon’s citizens reaffirmed the measure in 1996. The measure limits annual residential growth in the city to a number of dwelling units that is no more than 3 percent of the total number of housing units as of December 31 of the prior calendar year.
In addition, Measure B intended to create and maintain an approximate mix of 80% single-family housing units (including single-family attached and duplex units) and 20% multifamily dwelling units. The purpose of Measure B was to achieve a balanced housing mix and a steady, controlled rate of annual growth. The measure was designed to ensure that city infrastructure, services and facilities would be adequate to serve the needs of existing and future residents. In addition, the measure intended to allow the Dixon Unified School District the time to develop the financial resources necessary to properly and effectively finance, build and staff schools to meet the educational needs of residents.
In 2019, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill No. 330, also known as the Housing Crisis Act (“HCA”) (codified at Gov. Code,§ 66300 et seq.). The bill also made significant changes to the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”) (codified at Gov. Code, § 65589.5 et seq.) The HAA states, “California has accumulated an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with growth; the state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in home ownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5(a)(2)(D) and (E).
To achieve State housing goals, the HCA prohibits a city or county from establishing a new, or enforcing an existing, growth-control measure, that would limit the number of approvals or permits necessary for the construction of housing within all or a portion of the city or county, or caps the number of housing units that can be approved or built either annually or within a given time period (Gov. Code, § 66300(b)(1)(D)).
The HCA provides an exception allowing enforcement of an existing growth control measure if the jurisdiction and the growth control measure meet certain criteria provided in Government Code section 66300(b)(1)(E). The HCA specifies that a growth control measure can remain implemented if 1) the measure was adopted before January 1, 2025, and 2) the city is located in a predominantly agricultural county as determined by the most recent California Farmland Conversion Report.
In December 2022, the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) review of Dixon’s Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031) required that the city review Measure B for compliance with the HCA. HCD determined Measure B did not meet the requirements of the exception, and thus it was deemed noncompliant with the HCA. While Measure B was adopted prior to January 1, 2025, Solano County is not a predominately agricultural county as defined by Government Code § 66300 (b)(1)(E).
Accordingly, the city suspended Measure B to comply with state law. In order to ensure the State issued the city its required Housing Element certification, the City of Dixon suspended Measure B through the term of the 6th Cycle Housing Element with City Council Resolution 23-059 on March 21, 2023. Dixon’s 6th Cycle runs through 2031.
For more discussion on this topic, please see https://www.cityofdixonca.gov/housingelementupdate and review the March 21, 2023, Staff Report to the City Council.
For the city to get the Housing Element approved by the State of California, pursuant to Government Code § 65585.03, the city had to suspend Measure B. Without HCD’s approval, Dixon may face legal action by the Attorney General, lose eligibility for state grants and funding, and enable certain development projects streamlined approval with limited city input or comment (known as Builder’s Remedy).
The state takes precedence over local voter initiatives (preemption). When the State notified the city that continued enforcement of Measure B may be in violation of state law, staff and the legal team extensively reviewed and researched the issue, as well as consulted with other communities that have similar growth control measures. It was necessary to suspend Measure B to comply with state law and minimize the risks to the city.
Suspending Measure B was the best, and only legal course of action, given that 1) state law prohibits enforcement of a growth control measure; and 2) HCD’s determination of affected cities and counties prohibited from enforcing growth control measures remains valid until January 1, 2030 and it is unclear what state law after this date will require. (Gov. Code, § 66300(d).
The State prohibits the city from applying a cap on the number of housing units that can be approved or built either annually or within a given time period (Gov. Code, § 66300(b)(1)(D)).
