By Howard Fischer
Mail | X: @azcapmedia

PHOENIX — Worries that established neighborhoods would be overrun with high-density housing, that developers would take advantage of leases and even that witches could move in led a deeply divided Arizona house on Thursday to reject a measure giving churches the right to put homes on their land.

The measure that would have allowed established churches across the state to lease out portions of their property to developers to build single-family homes failed even though it was greatly watered down to try to win over opponents.

In a rare move, the House also voted to deny backers the routine ability to bring House Bill 2191 back for another vote. Although not fatal, since lawmakers have other options to revive the bill, it makes it much more difficult.

The bill is touted as a way to boost affordable housing in the state, which like many others is struggling with a housing shortage. But it drew the ire of neighborhood groups and cities because it would override local zoning rules and even opposition from a pastor who is a member of the House.

The pastor, Rep. Lupe Diaz, R -Benson, said he believes the measure puts churches at risk of losing their tax-exempt status. But he also said federal fair housing laws would kick in if homes were built on church-owned land, meaning the homes can’t be sold to only church members.

“The housing is going to be available to the general public, No. 1, which means that (anyone), contrary to what you believe, can come in,” Diaz said.

“It could be a witch coven,” he said. “It could be Satanists who move in, and that puts the church in a very critical position and very vulnerable position for lawsuits and that kind of thing.”

More divisive for many Republican members were concerns about overriding city zoning rules — something they’ve been open to doing in other housing bills that passed last year and are moving in the Legislature this year.

Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, a member of the GOP’s Freedom Caucus, said he can see conservative reasons to both support and oppose the measure.

“But on a much deeper level, I’m not torn whatsoever,” he said, saying he trusts his constituents and didn’t want to “change the character of their community without their consent.”

“They’re smart people, they’re hard-working people, they’re thoughtful people, and they’re people who are driven to do the right thing,” Kolodin said while explaining his “no’’ vote. “My voters do not need me to screw things up for them and to ruin what they’ve worked so hard for.”

Kolodin and Diaz both acknowledged the state has a housing crisis. But neither would vote to override cities and towns and their residents.

The measure gathered 28 votes in favor with 26 against, with both backing and opposition from members of both parties. But it takes a majority of all 60 House members — present or not — to get final approval.

As originally introduced, the measure would have allowed churches to lease parts of their properties to construct multistory apartment buildings on land near single-family homes. The bill sponsor, Rep. David Livingston, R-Peoria, amended the measure last week and again this week to address concerns.

Still, Livingston couldn’t get the needed votes.

“It’s tough to get enough votes on this bill today with six members missing, but I’m asking for your yes vote,” Livingston pleaded to members during the vote.

He said he would commit to making additional changes if the bill made it to the Senate, with House members getting one more chance to vote on it again in its final form. Livingston also said some members of the public were still not aware of major changes he’d already made to narrow its scope.

As originally crafted, the measure would have allowed apartment buildings on church property.
To try to line up votes, Livingston agreed to limit such developments to just single-family homes, as many as 17 homes on each acre of land but possibly as few as four or five per acre, depending on existing neighborhood zoning. And they would be limited to just two stories — just one if that was the character of the neighborhood — and could be no closer than 75 feet to existing neighborhoods.

Significant changes were made to the rules allowing churches to lease land to developers to address one of many concerns of proponents. Another change limited it to established churches — those in existence for 15 years or more — to address worries developers would find a loophole and partner with a new church created just to take advantage of the ability to make money by building homes.

“I would like to have churches more involved in the community,” Livingston said. “That is what’s driving me on this bill.”

Rep. Khyl Powell, R-Gilbert, said while he is convinced housing is a critical need, he can’t back the measure because he remained worried about the land lease specifics and that “density bonuses” developers could be awarded based on affordability that could let them pack in more homes than backers admit are possible.

He also said he remained unconvinced that as written the bill only allows single-family homes.

“They say that townhouses won’t be allowed, but still, there’s a possibility that it could be worked in there by developers,” Powell said.

Rep. Sarah Liguori, D-Tucson, said the shortage of affordable housing in the state means lawmakers have to act. She noted young people are considering moving out of state to find a home they can afford to buy or forced into long commutes because they can’t afford to live near their jobs.

“There are many things with housing that we cannot control,” she said.

“We can’t control the price. We can’t control the labor,” Liguori said. “But we must be working on the issues that we can control. And what this bill is attempting to do is to help bring a little bit of ease for housing to be built in our communities statewide.”