Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

RFPs are due by Oct 19. My first reaction was "there's no way city and state governments can work together to produce incentive packages that quickly".

On second thought, it makes me wonder if they're shopping for local governments which can be that responsive with an eye on getting stuff done efficiently in the future (permitting, zoning).



sort by: page size:

I think you are 100% right, it is a very tight deadline with very few manhours. I did not advance far enough in the proposal process to learn their budget but that sounds plausible to me.

We will do that now. We will start the competitive bidding process, and we expect the RFP paperwork to be returned by October, 2021. After that, if there are no injunctions filed because of the bidding process, preliminary design documents will start being created. Preliminary design review will occur August 2022. ...

I'm assuming to get it done before the end of the fiscal year.

I think you're correct, but the announcement is still welcome. People are gonna be waiting forever for any semblance of federal guidance, so at least these 3 states has decided they'll make calls together.

The "Will it be done before/at the unreasonable deadline?" report.

I think it's asking a lot for them to generate the specific actions in under a week, particularly as these actions will presumably not be needed until the start of the Summer semester at the earliest.

I doubt this applies to cities that adopted their housing elements by the Jan 31 deadline and submitted them as revisions that are still pending review by the HCD.

I'm sure some of those will still eventually be judged out of compliance and builder's remedy may stand, but for now they're just pending review.

The cities that are likely to actually be subjected to builder's remedy (which will be challenged in court, which might cause delays for any developers trying to use it, but is still a useful bargaining chip) are those marked as "NEW CYCLE". Those cities did not prepare any housing permitting plan submission to the HCD at all by the deadline.


I'm surprised they took this long, and at the same time somewhat concerned about whether they'll be a particularly nefarious lobby (hopefully not). Still, this is the natural order of things in the economy.

Is the two-year timeline reasonable?

I really hope it isn't. I've made much shorter estimates for a nearly identical application, with time penalization clauses.


A year? The article says this was proposed on October 22nd. But yeah, this seems like a plan they should have jumped on more quickly.

Why do you think that will be done sooner? (Sincere question; I just don't see any dates there and looks like they are still recruiting participants.)

They’re just waiting on the county or federal government to provide a recommendation that they can duck under. I know they are doing this for PAUSD’s response for sure.

Yes, a common misconception. The RHNA process is conducted on a rolling calendar. SANDAG had to close their housing elements in April 2021. SCAG cities had a deadline in October 2021. ABAG cities are due today. AMBAG is not due until December 2023.

Edit:

  RHNA: regional housing needs allocation
  SANDAG: San Diego Association of Governments
  SCAG: Southern California Association of Governments
  ABAG: Association of Bay Area Governments
  AMBAG: Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments

Anything's possible, but just due to timing that seems unlikely. The Council says they probably won't submit the legislation for review until December or January.

I have to say, I think this is really unfortunately timed. Just about everyone I know has already selected where they're going to be for the summer. I'll be curious to know if this works out for any of the companies involved.

Good point: considering the time frame, the comp does look like a forward looking statement.

As soon as the incentives dictate it and no sooner

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a chicken-and-egg problem where the funding application also has to contain a planned date and venue.

As it reads from the letter, it does seem like they handed in their application 3 months before the event. That seems like quite short notice and I would have expected ~6 months before the event, especially if there is no certainty/pre-commitment that the grant will go through.


From reading all two minutes of the article:

> The new plan could be completed in 15 to 20 months

next

Legal | privacy