Can a California city or county housing authority operate outside its own city or county boundaries?

Plain-English summary

The California Housing Finance Agency asked the Attorney General four related questions about how far a California housing authority's reach extends. Are these authorities really only city or county bodies, or can they operate anywhere in the state? Can an authority spin up a non-profit corporation and have that corporation do statewide work the authority itself cannot? Can the authority accept federal grants for projects in places where it has no statutory presence? And can a housing authority chartered in another state come into California and exercise the powers of a California housing authority?

The Attorney General said no to each.

The Housing Authorities Law (Health & Saf. Code, § 34200 et seq.) creates a separate housing authority "[i]n each city and county," and only authorizes the authority to operate after the local governing body has formally declared a need for it. Sections 34208 and 34209 then define the geographic "area of operation": for a city authority, the city plus the area within five miles of its boundaries (with carve-outs for other cities and active county authorities); for a county authority, the unincorporated parts of the county and any city within the county that has not formed its own authority. Section 34312 grants core powers to operate housing projects, lease housing, and finance development "[w]ithin its area of operation." Section 34327 likewise authorizes the acceptance of federal grants only "for or in aid of any housing project within its area of operation."

The opinion read those statutes together, and supplemented them with two structural rules. First, an administrative agency created by statute has only the powers the Legislature gave it; it cannot expand its own authority and cannot delegate authority to a controlled corporation that it does not itself possess. Second, when one part of a scheme expressly grants a power (like accepting grants inside the area of operation), courts treat that as implying the absence of the same power outside (the maxim from In re J.W. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 200, 209). The cumulative effect is that California's housing authorities are local in nature even if they are state agencies for some purposes, and out-of-state housing authorities cannot stand in their place.

The opinion was careful about one specific federal-law issue. A "public housing agency" under federal law (42 U.S.C. § 1437a(b)(6)(A)) is a federally defined concept distinct from a state-law "housing authority," and a housing authority recognized as a public housing agency may have separate federal duties (for example, administering Section 8 portability or acting as a "performance-based contract administrator" for HUD). The AG declined to decide whether federal law allows that kind of contract-administration role to extend beyond a state-law area of operation, expressly limiting the opinion to state-law jurisdiction.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2020. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: What is a California housing authority?
A: It is a public corporation created by the Housing Authorities Law in every city and county. Health & Saf. Code section 34201, subdivision (c) declares slum-clearance and low-income housing construction to be governmental functions of state concern. The authority does not become operational until the local governing body declares a need for it (§ 34240). It is governed by an appointed board of commissioners (§§ 34270, 34271, 34290).

Q: What is an "area of operation"?
A: For a city authority: the city plus the area within five miles of its boundaries, minus any area inside another city's territorial boundaries (unless that other city consents) and minus any unincorporated area of a county whose authority has been authorized to transact business (§ 34208). For a county authority: all of the county except any area inside the territorial boundaries of a city whose authority has been authorized to transact business, and outside that with limits described in § 34312.5 (§ 34209). Cities and counties may also band together to form an "area housing authority" with a combined area of operation (§§ 34240.1, 34246, 34247).

Q: Can a housing authority ever do anything outside its area of operation?
A: Yes, but only as specifically authorized by statute. Section 34312.5 lets an authority provide leased housing throughout the county in which it operates (with two preconditions). Section 34324 lets two authorities cooperate for financing purposes. Federal Section 8 portability rules (42 U.S.C. § 1437f(o)(13)(E) and (r)) require the authority to facilitate portability of vouchers when a tenant moves until the destination housing agency picks up the funding (Sabi v. Sterling (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 916, 922). Beyond those, the AG read the statutory grant of "accepting federal grants" in § 34327 narrowly: the authority cannot accept grants for projects outside its area of operation.

Q: What does it mean that a housing authority cannot delegate powers it does not have?
A: Standard agency law. An administrative agency cannot expand the authority the Legislature gave it (Western States Petroleum Assn v. Dept. of Health Services (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 999, 1006), and a housing authority cannot evade statutory geographic limits by handing the work to a non-profit corporation that the authority controls. The AG had reached the same conclusion about redevelopment agencies in 81 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 281 (1998).

Q: Why are housing authorities sometimes called "state agencies"?
A: They perform functions of statewide concern (slum clearance, low-income housing) using powers given to them by the State, but they are local in scope and operation. The AG and the courts have used "state agency" labeling depending on context. For Eleventh Amendment purposes, they are not arms of the state (Lynch v. San Francisco Housing Authority (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 527). For the open-meeting-act distinction at issue in Torres v. Bd. of Comrs. (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 545, they are local agencies covered by the Brown Act, not state agencies under Bagley-Keene. The Torres court summed it up: "[A] housing authority is local in scope and character, restricted geographically in its area of operation, and does not have statewide power or jurisdiction even though it is created by, and is an agent of, the state."

Q: What about federal Section 8 vouchers and portability?
A: A county housing authority is expressly authorized to apply for, process, and distribute Section 8 housing certificates (Health & Saf. Code, § 34327.3). California has incorporated federal Section 8 portability rules by reference, so when a Section 8 tenant moves out of an authority's area, the original authority remains responsible until the destination housing agency assumes the funding. That federal-law framework does not give state-law housing authorities the power to operate housing programs in places outside their state-defined area of operation.

Q: What is a "performance-based contract administrator"?
A: A federal HUD designation. HUD pays performance-based contract administrators to handle project-based Section 8 funding, subsidies attached to particular housing units rather than to a tenant. To play that role for HUD, the entity must be recognized as a "public housing agency" under 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(b)(6)(A), a federal-law definition. The opinion did not decide whether a California housing authority that is also a federally recognized public housing agency may serve as a contract administrator beyond its state-law area of operation.

Q: Can an out-of-state housing authority operate in California?
A: No. California has chosen to address low-income housing through California-chartered local housing authorities, and the Housing Authorities Law confers no power on out-of-state housing authorities or their corporations to act here. The opinion rests this on the Tenth Amendment / federalism principle from Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 95, 105: each state may adopt distinct policies to protect its own residents.

Background and statutory framework

California's housing authorities are creatures of the federal United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq.) and California's response to it. The state Housing Authorities Law was enacted in 1938 (Stats. 1938, Ex. Sess., p. 9) to allow California cities and counties to access federal low-income housing funds. The Legislature declared that clearing slum areas and constructing safe and sanitary low-income housing were "public uses and purposes for which public money may be spent and private property acquired" (Health & Saf. Code, § 34201, subd. (c)).

The statutory architecture is local. A separate housing authority exists in each city and county (§ 34240), defined areas of operation (§§ 34208, 34209), powers limited to those areas (§ 34312), grants tied to those areas (§ 34327, subd. (a)), and a statutory mechanism for geographic combination if cities and counties want to share an authority (§§ 34240.1, 34246, 34247). The legislative finding in section 34312.3, subdivision (f) makes the local design explicit: "It is the intent of the Legislature, and the Legislature declares, that housing authorities are the local entities with primary responsibility for providing housing for low-income and very low income households within their jurisdictions."

That local architecture, plus Mulville v. City of San Diego (1920) 183 Cal. 734's rule that municipal extraterritorial power exists only as expressly granted, was the foundation for the AG's negative answer to all four questions. The Housing Authority of City of Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (1952) 38 Cal.2d 853 case had already characterized housing authorities as administrative arms of the state pursuing a state objective within statutory limits, neither of which could be exercised beyond what the Legislature recognized. Combine that with the rule that an agency cannot delegate what it does not itself possess (American Federation of Labor v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1017, 1042), and the answers fall out of the structure.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- Health & Safety Code sections 34200-34380 (Housing Authorities Law)
- Health & Safety Code sections 34208, 34209 (areas of operation)
- Health & Safety Code section 34240 (need declaration prerequisite)
- Health & Safety Code section 34312 (powers within area of operation)
- Health & Safety Code section 34312.5 (extraterritorial leased-housing exception)
- Health & Safety Code section 34315.3 (acceptance of financial assistance)
- Health & Safety Code section 34324 (cooperation between authorities)
- Health & Safety Code section 34327 (federal grants within area of operation)
- Welfare and Institutions Code section 16517
- 42 U.S.C. § 1437 et seq. (Section 8)
- 42 U.S.C. § 1437a(b)(6)(A) (definition of "public housing agency")
- 24 C.F.R. § 982.1(b)(1)

Cases:
- Housing Authority of Los Angeles County v. Dockweiler (1939) 14 Cal.2d 437
- Housing Authority of City of Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (1952) 38 Cal.2d 853
- Mulville v. City of San Diego (1920) 183 Cal. 734
- Torres v. Bd. of Comrs. (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 545
- Lynch v. San Francisco Housing Authority (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 527
- McCarther v. Pacific Telesis Group (2010) 48 Cal.4th 104
- Coalition of Concerned Communities, Inc. v. Los Angeles (2004) 34 Cal.4th 733
- In re J.W. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 200
- American Federation of Labor v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 1017
- Western States Petroleum Assn v. Dept. of Health Services (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 999
- Sabi v. Sterling (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 916
- Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 95

Prior AG opinions cited:
- 81 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 281 (1998)
- 64 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 677 (1981)
- 25 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 164 (1955)

Source

• Landing page: https://oag.ca.gov/opinions/yearly-index
• Original PDF: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/opinions/pdfs/15-1102.pdf

Original opinion text

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
State of California
XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General

OPINION of XAVIER BECERRA, Attorney General; ANYA M. BINSACCA, Deputy Attorney General

No. 15-1102
March 17, 2020

Tia Boatman Patterson, the Executive Director of the California Housing Finance Agency, has requested an opinion on the following questions of state law:

1. Under California's Housing Authorities Law (Health & Saf. Code, § 34200 et seq.), may a local housing authority operate throughout the entire state?

2. May a corporation or other instrumentality formed by a local housing authority exercise the statutory powers of a local housing authority throughout the entire state?

3. May a local housing authority accept a federal grant for a housing project that is outside its territorial jurisdiction?

4. May an out-of-state housing authority, or a corporation formed by an out-of-state housing authority, exercise the statutory powers of a housing authority in California?

CONCLUSIONS

1. Under California's Housing Authorities Law (Health & Saf. Code, § 34200 et seq.), a local housing authority may not operate generally throughout the entire state; it may operate outside its defined geographic boundaries as specifically allowed or contemplated by statute.

2. A local housing authority may not delegate a statutory power it does not have. Because a local housing authority may not operate generally throughout the entire state under state law, it may not delegate such power to a corporation or other instrumentality.

3. State law does not allow a local housing authority to accept a federal grant for a housing project outside its territorial jurisdiction.

4. An out-of-state housing authority, or a corporation formed by an out-of-state housing authority, may not exercise the statutory powers of a housing authority in California.

ANALYSIS

California's housing authorities have their origin in the United States Housing Act of 1937, which Congress enacted to "promote the general welfare of the nation" by remedying "'the unsafe and insanitary housing conditions and the acute shortage of decent, safe and sanitary dwellings for families of low income.'" The Housing Act authorized the federal government "to make loans to public-housing agencies of the several states or their political subdivisions with a view to assisting in the development, acquisition or administration of low-rent housing or slum-clearance projects."

To avail California of this federal funding, and recognizing a shortage of safe, affordable housing, our Legislature enacted the state Housing Authorities Law in 1938. The Legislature declared that clearing areas of unsafe and insanitary dwellings, and constructing safe and sanitary housing projects for low-income people, were "public uses and purposes for which public money may be spent and private property acquired and are governmental functions of state concern . . . ." To address these concerns, the Housing Authorities Law created, in each county and city, a public corporation known as a housing authority, which is not authorized to operate until the governing body of the county or city declares a need for it. Each housing authority is governed by an appointed board of commissioners.

1. May a Local Housing Authority Operate Throughout the State?

Our first question is whether a housing authority created by California's Housing Authorities Law has statewide jurisdiction as a matter of state law. We begin our inquiry with the statutes that create and govern housing authorities. "Our primary task when faced with a question of statutory construction is to determine the intent of the Legislature, and we begin by looking to the statutory language." In determining such intent, "[w]e must give 'the language its usual, ordinary import and accord[] significance, if possible, to every word, phrase and sentence in pursuance of the legislative purpose.'" If the statutory language is clear, we "follow its plain meaning unless a literal interpretation would result in absurd consequences the Legislature did not intend." The statutory language must be read "in the context of the statutory framework as a whole in order to determine its scope and purpose and to harmonize the various parts of the enactment."

Here we are also guided by the tenet that if an agency is "created by statute, the agency's authority is circumscribed by the relevant legislation." "[I]t is well settled that administrative agencies have only the powers conferred on them, either expressly or by implication, by Constitution or statute," and an agency cannot itself expand the scope of authority legislatively delegated to it. Our Supreme Court has explained that both local governments and housing authorities are "vested with specific duties and powers under the Housing Authorities Law and Housing Cooperation Law to effect a state objective. Neither is functioning independently of that state law. In pursuing the state objective each is governed by the state law and neither may exercise powers not vested or recognized by that law."

We first observe that housing authorities are created "[i]n each city and county," and cannot operate in the first instance unless authorized by the locality in which they exist. Additionally, the Housing Authorities Law defines "areas of operation" for both city and county authorities. For a city authority, the area of operation:

includes the city and the area within five miles of its territorial boundaries. It does not include any area which lies within the territorial boundaries of another city unless the governing body of such other city has consented by resolution. It does not include any area which lies within the unincorporated area of any county for which an authority has been authorized to transact business. If a county authority becomes empowered to transact business and exercise its powers, a city authority empowered to transact business and exercise its powers in any of the unincorporated area of the county shall not initiate any further project within such unincorporated territory.

A county authority's area of operation:

includes all of the county except the area within the territorial boundaries of any city for which an authority has been authorized to transact business. Except as authorized by Section 34312.5, a county authority shall not operate in any city located in the county and in which an authority has not been authorized to transact business unless the consent of the city governing body has been obtained. If an authority of a city within a county becomes empowered to transact business and exercise its powers, a county authority empowered to transact business and exercise its powers has no power to initiate any further project or leased housing within the territorial boundaries of the city, except as provided in Section 34312.5.

The foregoing statutes appear in the first chapter of the Housing Authorities Law, among the general provisions. The Law also allows cities and counties to band together to form "area housing authorit[ies]," with the area of operation being "the combined possible areas of operation of participating cities and counties . . . ."

The portion of the Housing Authorities Law that enumerates the powers and duties of housing authorities also refers to the authorities' areas of operation. In the grant of power addressing the fundamental role of housing authorities, section 34312 gives a housing authority the ability to, "[w]ithin its area of operation," prepare and operate housing projects for low-income people, provide for construction or repair of a housing project, lease housing to low-income people, and finance the acquisition, construction, development, and rehabilitation of low-income housing. Read together, the plain meaning of these provisions is that the Legislature intended housing authorities generally to have limited geographic areas of operation. Because the statutory scheme creating housing authorities dictates that they generally operate in a circumscribed geographic area, and because the scheme contains no general grant of authority to operate statewide, we conclude that housing authorities may not generally operate statewide as a matter of state law.

Our conclusion is reinforced by the fact that the Housing Authorities Law specifies circumstances in which authorities may act outside their areas of operation. For example, section 34312.5 allows an authority to "provide leased housing to persons of low income throughout the county in which it operates," with two exceptions: "(1) No commitment to provide leased housing outside the area of operation may be made in advance of construction without approval of the local governing body of the city or, if an unincorporated area, the county with jurisdiction of the site of construction; and (2) Leased housing may not be provided within the area of operation of another authority if the local governing body of the other authority disapproves in advance." This specific and circumscribed grant of extraterritorial authority is strong indication that the Legislature did not contemplate that housing authorities would have blanket authority to operate outside their local area.

As another example, section 34314 grants authorities the ability to "arrange or contract for the furnishing by any person or agency, public or private, of services, privileges, works, or facilities for, or in connection with, a housing project," or its occupants. Similarly, section 34311 allows an authority to make and execute contracts "necessary or convenient to the exercise of its powers," and some of those contracts may be with parties outside an authority's area of operation. But these limited provisions cannot be read as expanding housing authorities' statutorily defined powers.

Thus to say that a housing authority lacks jurisdiction to operate statewide generally does not mean that a housing authority may never act outside its area of operation. One commenter observes that if tenants receiving federal Section 8 funding to subsidize their rent move out of a housing authority's area of operation, the authority is still responsible, under federal law, for providing portability of that funding until the tenants begin receiving Section 8 funding from the destination housing agency. A county housing authority is expressly and specifically authorized to "apply for, process, and distribute . . . housing certificates issued pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (Sec. 1437 et seq., Title 42, U.S.C.) to families deemed eligible pursuant to Section 16517 of the Welfare and Institutions Code." The state may adopt federal statutes by reference, and thus our Legislature has incorporated Section 8's portability provisions as part of its authorization for housing authorities to administer Section 8 certificates. Moreover, the federal statutory scheme, by providing benefit portability, contemplates that Section 8 recipients might move between residences, each of which is under the jurisdiction of a different local housing authority with limited territorial jurisdiction.

We recognize that housing authorities share characteristics of both state and local agencies. But the state character of housing authorities relates to their mission in exercising the state's police powers, and provides no basis for concluding that they may generally operate statewide. We have previously observed that "a housing authority is not a 'state agency' in the sense that it is part of the 'state government,' but is a 'state agency' in the sense that it performs functions of statewide concern, albeit in a limited geographical area. It is also a 'state agency' in contra-distinction to being part of city or county government. In short, a housing authority performs governmental functions of state concern within limited boundaries."

Courts have also noted the mixed state and local character of housing authorities and have remarked on the territorial limitations of housing authorities. For example, in Torres v. Board of Commissioners (1979) 89 Cal.App.3d 545, the Court of Appeal considered which open meeting act applied to housing authorities: the Ralph M. Brown Act, which covers local agencies, or the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, which covers state agencies. The Court of Appeal concluded that, although housing authorities are state agencies for some purposes, they were either "local public agencies" or "municipal corporations" covered by the Brown Act for open meeting purposes. "[A] housing authority is local in scope and character, restricted geographically in its area of operation, and does not have statewide power or jurisdiction even though it is created by, and is an agent of, the state rather than of the city or county in which it functions. Respondents are correct in noting that no housing authority has statewide powers or jurisdiction . . . ."

California's Housing Authorities Law presents a statutory scheme contemplating local housing authorities developing and operating housing projects within their areas of operation. Although housing authorities may take specified actions outside their areas of operation in furtherance of their local missions as authorized or contemplated by statute, they do not have general authority under state law to operate statewide.

2. May a Corporation Formed by a Local Housing Authority Exercise the Statutory Powers of a Local Housing Authority Throughout the Entire State?

An agency created by statute cannot expand the scope of its authority beyond what the Legislature has delegated to it. Axiomatically, a local housing authority cannot delegate to another instrumentality authority it does not possess. "An administrative agency must act within the powers conferred upon it by law and may not act in excess of those powers." Thus, a housing authority cannot delegate authority to another instrumentality to operate statewide if the housing authority itself lacks that authority.

Consistent with the above, we have observed that delegations of statutory powers carry with them related statutory constraints. Thus with respect to corporations formed by redevelopment agencies, we noted, "We do not believe . . . statutory requirements, many of which are intended to benefit persons within a redevelopment project area, may be avoided by delegating administrative responsibilities to a nonprofit corporation. A redevelopment agency may not circumvent legislative requirements through the device of assigning administrative responsibilities to a nonprofit corporation which is subject to its control." Similarly, a housing authority may not escape statutorily imposed geographic limitations by delegating authority to a corporation or other instrumentality.

3. May a Local Housing Authority Accept a Federal Grant for a Housing Project that Is Outside Its Territorial Jurisdiction?

The Housing Authorities Law authorizes housing authorities to accept "federal grants or other federal assistance" in furtherance of their mission. Specifically, section 34327, subdivision (a) states that a housing authority may "[b]orrow money or accept federal grants or other financial assistance from the federal government for or in aid of any housing project within its area of operation." Thus, by the terms of that statute, housing authorities are empowered only to accept federal grants for projects within their areas of operation; the statute does not give them authority to accept federal grants for projects outside their areas of operation. The expression of one concept in a statute ordinarily indicates the exclusion of others, so by expressly conferring on housing authorities the power to accept federal grants for projects within their areas of operation, the Legislature has impliedly prevented them from accepting such grants for projects outside of the area of operation.

The Housing Authorities Law also contains a more general authorization to accept funding in section 34315.3: "An authority may accept financial or other assistance from any public or private source, and expend any funds so received for the purposes of this chapter and the activities permitted to authorities by state law, including leased housing." But it would be a strained reading of this section to conclude that it authorizes a housing authority to accept federal grants for a housing project outside its jurisdiction. A statute must be construed in the context of the "entire scheme of which it is part so that the whole may be harmonized and retain effectiveness." As noted earlier, the general scheme set out by the Housing Authorities Law is one of local authorities developing and administering housing projects within their areas of operation, and section 34327 specifically addresses federal grants for housing projects within the area of operation. Given that section 34315.3 directs that grants accepted by a housing authority must be for "purposes of this chapter and the activities permitted to authorities by state law," the interpretation in harmony with the Housing Authorities Law is that federal grants are intended to facilitate authorized activities within the authority's area of operation. Nothing in the Housing Authorities Law permits a housing authority to accept a federal grant for a project outside its jurisdiction.

One commenter notes a "distinction between a public housing agency under federal law and a public housing authority under state law," contending that an entity recognized by the federal government as a "public housing agency" may act as a contract administrator for the federal government on a statewide basis. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides various forms of funding supporting low-income housing. An organization that wishes to act as a "performance-based contract administrator" for HUD in distributing funding (and attendant responsibilities such as inspecting properties) must be recognized by HUD as a "public housing agency," defined as "any State, county, municipality, or other government entity or public body (or agency or instrumentality thereof) which is authorized to engage in or assist in the development or operation of public housing." We are informed that all local housing authorities in California have been approved by HUD as public housing agencies, as has the California Housing Finance Agency. Some housing authorities also have non-profit instrumentalities that are recognized as federal housing agencies, and two of those non-profits have in recent years acted as HUD's performance-based contract administrators for most of the project-based Section 8 funding from HUD in California. Project-based Section 8 funding provides rental subsidies directly to landlords and is attached to a housing unit, rather than providing funding directly to a renter.

The commenter argues that regardless whether a housing authority may operate statewide with respect to owning property, such an entity (or its instrumentality) may act throughout the State as a performance-based contract administrator for HUD when operating in its capacity as a public housing agency under federal law. But we have not been asked whether, under federal law, such an entity may act outside of its area of operation to provide contract administration services to HUD in the entity's capacity as a public housing agency. We take no position on that question.

4. May an Out-of-State Housing Authority, or a Corporation Formed by an Out-of-State Housing Authority, Exercise the Powers of a Housing Authority in California?

California, as a sovereign state, may exercise its police powers to protect the safety, health, and welfare of its citizens. The Legislature has accomplished this in part through enactment of the Housing Authorities Law, conferring on local housing authorities the power to promote safety, health, and welfare in defined ways. But the Legislature has not provided this power to any other state, nor to any out-of-state corporation.

Our "federal system contemplates that individual states may adopt distinct policies to protect their own residents . . . ." California has opted to address the scarcity of low-income housing through local housing authorities, and has left no room for out-of-state housing authorities or corporations to participate in that exercise of its police powers. Thus, neither an out-of-state housing authority, nor a corporation formed by one, may exercise the powers of a housing authority in California.