Opposition to a proposed homelessness agency splintered Tuesday, with some Sacramento region officials now open to the proposal.

When California state Sen. Angelique Ashby unveiled Senate Bill 802 last month to create the Sacramento Housing and Homelessness Agency for a regional approach to homelessness services and affordable housing development, she faced immediate pushback from the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and mayors of Sacramento, Elk Grove, Citrus Heights, Rancho Cordova and Folsom.

“As the respective local leaders throughout the Sacramento region, we respectfully urge the committee to vote no on SB 802 and allow local jurisdictions to continue working toward a collaborative solution that strengthens regional alignment while preserving local expertise and accountability,” they wrote in a joint letter against the bill.

But when elected officials from the Board of Supervisors, Folsom and Sacramento gathered to reiterate their dissent Tuesday, representatives from Elk Grove, Citrus Heights and Rancho Cordova were absent.

The three suburban cities shifted their positions on the bill from opposition to neutrality following a meeting with Ashby and, according to Supervisor Pat Hume, hourslong text message negotiations, resulting in amendments to the bill that were to be heard in committee Wednesday.

“(At) 7:30 last night, I would have thought I would have seen all of those cities here,” said Folsom Mayor Sarah Aquino. “By 11:30 p.m., it was clear that Folsom would be here today.”

Meeting of the mayors

Negotiations between Ashby and Sacramento-region cities did not begin Monday evening, according to Elk Grove City Councilmember Darren Suen. Ashby reached out to the region’s mayors two weeks ago, Suen said, and held a meeting last Thursday to discuss their concerns with the agency.

For the suburban cities, the main sticking point was a “loss of local control,” which was cited in each of their letters of opposition to the bill.

Ashby’s proposed agency would apply for, receive and administer federal, state and local funding for housing and homelessness. Elk Grove, Citrus Heights, Rancho Cordova and Folsom all objected to the transfer of their direct funding to the new group, according to their respective opposition letters.

Aquino said she raised the concern at last Thursday’s meeting and would not support legislation that siphons federal grant money from Folsom to a regional joint powers authority. Suen, who attended the meeting in place of Elk Grove’s mayor, said Ashby was open to hearing concerns and adjusting her proposal.

“If you asked me when I walked out of the room, there was a 50-50 chance we would get something,” Suen said.

Two days later, Ashby sent the mayors a first draft of proposed amendments. Over the course of the weekend and into the late hours of Monday, Suen said, elected city officials, city managers, and attorneys from Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova and Citrus Heights worked alongside Ashby and her staff to produce alterations to the bill, including two new safeguards for suburban cities’ funding.

If SB 802 passes, the SHHA would be governed by a single board consisting of three Sacramento County supervisors, three Sacramento City Council members, two Elk Grove City Council members, and one council member from Rancho Cordova, Citrus Heights and Folsom. Ashby’s amendments, released Tuesday, require the governing board to ensure equitable distribution of funding and resources across all cities and spend local housing funds within the city from which they were originally collected.

While most of the language was settled Monday night, according to Suen, the amendments were still in flux early Tuesday, hours before he was set to join the Board of Supervisors in voicing opposition to the bill.

“I woke up this morning not sure if I was going to drive south to work or up north to the press conference,” Suen said.

But by the time the conference started, the verdict was in: Elk Grove, Citrus Heights and Rancho Cordova no longer sided with the opposition.

Like Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova’s shift was caused by the city’s collaboration with Ashby to change parts of the bill’s language, according to Maria Chacon Kniestedt, public affairs director for Rancho Cordova.

“With these amendments introduced, the city would be able to move to a neutral position on SB 802 as it would remove language that would create barriers in our ability to be nimble and bring successful affordable housing projects and services to our residents,” Kniestedt said.

Opposition remains

Folsom is now the only suburban city opposed to Ashby’s bill.

The recent changes have not swayed Aquino but solidified her position. While she was privy to the proposed amendment over the last few days, she said it was difficult to keep track of edits.

Because changes were being made close to midnight Monday, Aquino said Folsom’s attorneys were unable to analyze the amendments’ language by Tuesday morning.

“There have been a flurry of negotiations in the past 48 hours, only with suburban cities,” Aquino said. “And while that may be good for the city of Folsom, it really isn’t good for the spirit of collaboration.”

Last Thursday’s meeting brought together Ashby and elected officials from all of the region’s cities, according to Suen. But Aquino said the city of Sacramento was not involved in the legislative changes made this weekend or Monday.

Ashby did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The city of Sacramento is itself divided on Ashby’s proposal. Councilmembers Mai Vang, Caity Maple and Karina Talamantes have sent letters in support of the bill, and Councilmember Lisa Kaplan stood alongside Ashby when she unveiled her plan last month. On the other end of the dais, Mayor Kevin McCarty and Councilmember Phil Pluckebaum have maintained opposition to SB 802, calling it an overreach and a step in the wrong direction.

Aquino said the best move forward is actually a pause. She suggested that Ashby change the legislation into a two year bill so more collaboration can occur between city officials and state legislators. But on Wednesday morning, the bill was to continue to committee.

Suen planned to attend as a representative of Elk Grove to see if any changes occur to the bill.

“There are a lot of moving parts — still moving,” Suen said. “We’ll see what happens tomorrow.”