Housing is a Human Right Act

Housing is a Human Right Act is a landmark California statute that codifies the principle that every resident of the state has a fundamental human right to housing. Enacted in 2019, the law represents a significant policy shift aimed at addressing the state's severe homelessness crisis through a rights-based framework. It mandates that all relevant state agencies consider this right in their policies, planning, and legislative analyses, directing resources toward systemic solutions.

Background and legislative history

The act emerged against the backdrop of a protracted and worsening homelessness emergency in major urban centers like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego. Advocacy groups, including the Western Center on Law & Poverty and the National Homelessness Law Center, had long campaigned for recognizing housing as a legal right, drawing inspiration from international frameworks like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The legislative push gained momentum following high-profile reports from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the University of California, Berkeley that detailed the scale of the crisis. Introduced as Assembly Bill 1487 by Assemblymember Miguel Santiago of Los Angeles, the bill garnered support from a coalition of Democratic legislators, including Scott Wiener and Toni Atkins. It was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2019 as part of a broader package of housing measures responding to the urgent situation documented by entities like the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority.

Key provisions and legal framework

The act's core mandate requires the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to administer programs, policies, and regulations with the explicit goal of fulfilling the right to housing. It does not create an individually enforceable claim to a specific housing unit but establishes a statewide objective to reduce homelessness and increase affordable housing supply. A critical component is the requirement for the California State Auditor to report on the effectiveness of state-funded homelessness programs. The law also aligns with other California statutes, such as the California Environmental Quality Act and the Housing Accountability Act, by instructing agencies to consider the right to housing during environmental reviews and local planning processes. This framework is designed to influence decisions made by bodies like the California Transportation Commission and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee.

Support and advocacy

The legislation was championed by a powerful alliance of housing justice organizations, legal advocates, and public health experts. Key supporters included the California Housing Partnership, the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California. These groups argued that the law was a necessary foundational step to hold state government accountable and shift policy from managing homelessness to ending it. Endorsements also came from prominent figures like Dolores Huerta and institutions such as the University of Southern California's Sol Price School of Public Policy. The support was rooted in research linking stable housing to improved outcomes in public health, education, and economic mobility, often citing studies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Opposition and criticism

Opposition to the act primarily came from groups concerned about fiscal impacts, government overreach, and the law's lack of an immediate enforcement mechanism. Organizations like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce expressed worries about potential future liabilities and mandates on local governments. Some policy analysts from institutions like the Hoover Institution and the Manhattan Institute criticized the act as a symbolic gesture that failed to address fundamental barriers to housing construction, such as restrictive zoning laws and the California Coastal Act. Critics also pointed to the experiences of cities like Seattle and Portland, Oregon, which have similar declarations but continue to struggle with homelessness, arguing the law did not compel concrete action from the California State Legislature or alter landmark court decisions like Martin v. City of Boise.

Implementation and impact

Since its enactment, implementation has focused on integrating the right-to-housing principle into state planning and grant-making processes. The California Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council has used the mandate to guide the distribution of funds from initiatives like Project Homekey and the California Emergency Solutions and Housing Program. The required audit by the California State Auditor, released in 2021, provided a critical assessment of state efforts, highlighting coordination failures between agencies like the California Department of Social Services and the California Health and Human Services Agency. While the act has not solved the homelessness crisis, it has created a persistent legal and policy benchmark, influencing subsequent legislation such as the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act and shaping advocacy efforts in other jurisdictions, including New York City and the state of Vermont.

Category:California law Category:2019 in American law Category:Human rights in the United States Category:Housing in California