(1) Existing law requires certain transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt regional transportation plans directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. Existing law requires each regional transportation plan to include a sustainable communities strategy prepared by each metropolitan planning organization in order to, among other things, identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan taking into account net migration into the region, population growth, household formation, and employment growth. This bill would require the sustainable communities strategy, in identifying areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, to also take into account changes in enrollment levels at institutions of public higher education, as defined. By imposing additional duties on metropolitan planning organizations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revision of the housing element, the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region in a specified manner. Existing law requires the department to meet and consult with the council of governments regarding the assumptions and methodologies to be used to determine each region's housing needs and requires the council of governments to provide data assumptions from the council of governments' projections, including specified data for the region, if available. As part of that requirement, existing law directs the council of governments to provide data assumptions regarding anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. This bill would require the Department of Finance to consider changes in enrollment levels at campuses of the University of California or the California State University in the region, as forecasted by the University of California and California State University pursuant to the provisions described below, when preparing the anticipated household growth associated with projected population increases. Existing law requires each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, to develop a proposed methodology for distributing the existing and projected regional housing need to cities, counties, and cities and counties within the region or within the subregion, as provided. Existing law requires, to the extent that sufficient data is available, each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the methodology, to consider including several specified factors, including the housing needs generated by the presence of a private university or a campus of the California State University or the University of California within any member jurisdiction. This bill would require each council of governments or delegate subregion, as applicable, in developing the proposed methodology, to also consider including the distribution of students of the above-described universities among jurisdictions within the region, and for a campus of the California State University or the University of California, the optimization of transit, pedestrian, and other nonvehicle trip efficiency by students to the campus, including off-campus facilities. The bill would request the Regents of the University of California, and require the Trustees of the California State University, to provide, no more than 6 months before the development of the proposed methodology for the 7th and each subsequent housing element cycle, except as specified, to each council of governments a forecast of changes in enrollment levels at its campuses, including off-campus facilities, within the region based on specified factors and to provide, upon request, trip and travel data. By imposing additional duties on councils of government, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) CEQA requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report (EIR) on a project that the lead agency proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. Existing law makes the selection of a location for a particular campus of public higher education and the approval of a long-range development plan subject to CEQA and requires preparation of an EIR. Existing law provides that enrollment or changes in enrollment, by themselves, do not constitute a project for purposes of CEQA. CEQA regulations require an EIR to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, including a "no project" alternative analysis for the purpose of allowing decisionmakers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. This bill would specify that the University of California and the California State University are not required to conduct a "no project" alternative analysis in an EIR, a supplemental EIR, or an addendum for a development project, for which the University of California or the California State University, respectively, is the lead agency, if specified conditions are met, including that the University of California or the California State University, respectively, has provided the forecast of changes in enrollment levels for purposes of developing the most recent methodology pursuant to the above-described provisions. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.01 of the Government Code proposed by SB 233, AB 650, and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one, two, or all of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would also incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.04 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 and AB 1275 to be operative only if this bill and one or both of the other bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires a person or entity proposing a change in use of a mobilehome park to file a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use of the mobilehome park that includes a replacement and relocation plan, as specified. Existing law requires the legislative body or advisory agency to review the report before any change of use, as provided. Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing. This bill would require, if a closure, cessation, or change of use is the result of damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, as defined, the person or entity proposing that closure, cessation, or change of use to file an impact report, as described in the paragraph above, which also includes a technical service inspection report from the Department of Housing and Community Development that identifies the observed conditions within the park. By placing new requirements on local legislative bodies when approving permits for a change of use for mobilehome parks, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the person or entity proposing the change of use of a mobilehome park to pay to the displaced resident the in-place market value of the displaced resident's mobilehome, as provided. This bill would provide that if the proposed closure, cessation, or change of use is related to damage or destruction by a disaster, the person or entity proposing the change of use of a mobilehome park is not required to pay to the displaced resident the in-place market value of the displaced resident's mobilehome. (2) Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies. Existing law requires the lessor of a building intended for human occupation to repair dilapidations, as specified, rendering it untenantable. Existing law requires a dwelling to be deemed untenantable if it substantially lacks certain affirmative standard characteristics. This bill would impose a duty upon the landlord to undertake certain actions, within a reasonable time and according to specified cleaning protocols, as may be necessary to remediate any dilapidations that arise as a result of a disaster. The bill would establish a presumption that the presence at the rental unit of debris from the disaster renders the unit untenantable, until a determination has been made by a local public health agency or official that the debris does not contain toxic substances. This bill would require the landlord to notify the tenant in writing that the landlord has fulfilled its duty to remediate dilapidations and that the tenant may view various reports, if requested. The bill would specify that these provisions do not require a landlord to rebuild a residential real property or any portion thereof that has sustained damage as a result of a disaster, and that, unless lawfully terminated by either party, the tenancy remains in effect and the tenant has the right to return to the rental unit, at the same rental rate in effect immediately prior to the disaster, as soon as it is safe and practicable. (3) Existing law terminates the hiring of a thing by the destruction of the thing hired, or when the greater part of the thing hired perishes from any other cause than the want of ordinary care of the hirer. This bill would require the landlord to return to the tenant any advance rental payments made by the tenant when the hiring of residential real property is terminated due to damage or destruction of the property. The bill would also require management of a mobilehome park to return to the homeowner any advance rental payments made by the homeowner when the mobilehome tenancy is terminated due to damage or the destruction of the mobilehome park or any space as a result of a disaster. The bill would discharge the tenant's or homeowner's obligation to pay rent during any period during which a tenant or homeowner is unable to occupy their rental unit due to a mandatory evacuation order pursuant to a disaster, as provided. (4) Existing law makes the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation the head of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which executes the laws of this state relating to, among other things, residential mortgage lenders and servicers and mortgage loan originators employed or supervised by finance lenders or residential mortgage lenders. This bill would require the commissioner to, upon the declaration of a state of emergency due to wildfire, as specified, coordinate with mortgage lenders and servicers subject to the commissioner's jurisdiction operating in this state to facilitate and monitor the implementation and promotion of mortgage forbearance, foreclosure prevention, and loss mitigation programs available to borrowers who experience a material decrease in household income or a material increase in household expenses due, directly or indirectly, to the wildfire emergency. (5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development, as defined, within the city or county with a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct specified units and meets other requirements. This bill would specify that a concession and incentive shall not result in a proposed project, as prescribed, with a specified commercial floor area ratio. The bill would also specify that certain provisions of the Density Bonus Law do not require a city, county, or city and county to approve, grant a concession or incentive requiring approval of, or waive or reduce development standards otherwise applicable to, transient lodging as part of a housing development, except as specified.
Existing law, the Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act, among other things, establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing and to provide housing assistance and home loans. Existing law sets forth various general powers of the department in implementing these programs, including authorizing the department to enter into long-term contracts or agreements of up to 30 years for the purpose of servicing loans or grants or enforcing regulatory agreements or other security documents. Existing law requires the department, subject to certain conditions, to allow property owners subject to a regulatory agreement with the department to take out additional debt on the development in order to finance, with the department's approval, the rehabilitation of the property or investment in new affordable housing. Under existing law, one of those conditions is that any extracted equity is required to meet at least one of several conditions, as specified. Existing law defines "extracted equity" for these purposes to mean debt added to a department-regulated property that is not used in prescribed ways. This bill would, additionally, require the department to allow property owners to take out additional debt, as described above, if any extracted equity is utilized for reimbursement of borrower advances for predevelopment costs, unreimbursed capital improvements, and unreimbursed operating deficits. The bill would revise the definition of "extracted equity" to mean debt distributed funds that are financed with debt that is secured by a department-regulated property and is not used in prescribed ways.
Existing law provides that recorded covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits on the use of land contained in instruments affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that, among other things, restrict the number, size, or location of the residences that may be built on the property, are not enforceable against the owner of an affordable housing development, as defined, if an approved restrictive covenant affordable housing modification document has been recorded in the public record, as provided. As part of this process, existing law requires the owner to submit to the county recorder a copy of the original restrictive covenant and any documents the owner believes necessary to establish that the property qualifies as an affordable housing development and requires the county counsel to determine, among other things, if the property qualifies as an affordable housing development and if a modification document may be recorded. Existing law provides that these provisions do not authorize any development that is not otherwise consistent with local general plans, zoning ordinances, and any applicable specific plan. This bill would extend those provisions to a housing development that is owned or controlled by an entity or individual that has submitted a development project application to redevelop an existing commercial property, and the development project includes residential uses permitted by state housing laws or local land use and zoning regulations and would make various conforming changes. The bill would additionally make these provisions applicable to covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits contained in a reciprocal easement agreement, as provided, and include instruments affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property that prohibits the number, size, or location of residences that may be built on the property or restricts or prohibits the residential uses of the property. The bill would further provide that these provisions do not authorize any development that is not otherwise consistent with state housing laws. By imposing additional duties on county officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law relating to housing development approval requires a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. Existing law establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant and consequences for a local agency that fails to meet that timeline, as provided. Existing law defines "postentitlement phase permit" to, among other things, include a range of permits issued by a local agency. This bill would require a state agency to comply with the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits applicable to a local agency. The bill would require a state agency to make the information list, as described above, and the above-described examples of a complete, approved application and a complete set of postentitlement phase permits available on the agency's internet website by January 1, 2026. The bill would deem a postentitlement phase permit approved, and all related reviews complete, if a state agency fails to meet the time limits for review of an application for that permit. The bill would revise the definition of "postentitlement phase permit" for purposes of these provisions to, among other things, include permits issued by a state agency and any postentitlement review by a state agency that is necessary to begin construction of a development that is intended to be at least 23 residential, excluding certain discretionary and ministerial permits and reviews and subject to specified exceptions, and would define the term "state agency" for these purposes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law governs the obligations of tenants and landlords. Existing law authorizes a tenant to deduct the payment made to a public utility or publicly owned utility or a district from the rent, as specified. Existing law prohibits a lessor who has retaliated against a lessee for exercising the lessee's prescribed rights from recovering possession of a dwelling, causing the lessee to quit involuntarily, increasing the rent, or decreasing services within 180 days of the occurrence of specified events relating to tenability, if the lessee is not in default on their rent, as specified. Existing law presumes that the hiring of real property is renewed for a specified amount of time, under specified circumstances. For any residential tenancy commenced, renewed, or continuing on a month-to-month or other periodic basis, on or after January 1, 2026, this bill would require a landlord or their agent to allow the tenant to opt out of paying for any subscription from a third-party internet service provider for specified services in connection with the tenancy. If the landlord or their agent violates this provision, the bill would authorize the tenant to deduct the cost of the subscription from the rent. The bill would prohibit a landlord or their agent from retaliating against a tenant for exercising their rights pursuant to this bill and consistent with the above-described provision on retaliation, as provided.
Existing law provides for the creation by local ordinance, or by ministerial approval if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned for single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law prohibits a local agency from issuing a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before the local agency issues a certificate of occupancy for the primary dwelling. This bill, notwithstanding that prohibition, would require a local agency to issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit constructed in a county that is subject to a proclamation of a state of emergency made by the Governor on or after February 1, 2025, even if the primary dwelling has not yet been issued a certificate of occupancy, if certain requirements are met, including that the primary dwelling was substantially damaged or destroyed by an event referenced in the state of emergency proclamation. By imposing new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a permitting agency to either approve or deny an application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the permitting agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. Existing law deems the application approved if the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days. Under existing law, if the permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create or serve a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, the permitting agency may delay approving or denying the permit application for the accessory dwelling unit until the permitting agency approves or denies the permit application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, as provided. The California Coastal Act of 1976, which is administered by the California Coastal Commission, requires any person wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, as defined, to obtain a coastal development permit from a local government or the commission, except as provided. Existing law specifies that the laws governing accessory dwelling units do not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the act, except as specified. This bill would create an exception to the above provision by requiring a local government or the commission, as specified, to either approve or deny a coastal development permit application for an accessory dwelling unit within 60 days of receiving a completed application. The bill would, notwithstanding that 60-day time limit, authorize the commission, if a coastal development permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a coastal development permit application to create or serve a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, to delay approving or denying the coastal development permit application for the accessory dwelling unit until the commission approves or denies the coastal development permit application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling. Under the bill, and except under the circumstance described above, if the commission has not approved or denied a completed application within 60 days, the application would be deemed approved. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards, including that the development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units. This bill would deem an adaptive reuse project a use by right in all zones, regardless of the zoning of the site, and subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process if the project meets specified requirements, subject to specified exceptions. In this regard, an adaptive reuse project, in order to qualify for the streamlined, ministerial review process, would be required to be proposed for an existing building or structure that is less than 50 years old or meets certain requirements regarding the preservation of historic resources, including the signing of an affidavit declaring that the project will comply with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for, among other things, the preservation of exterior facades of a building or structure that face a street, or receive federal or state historic rehabilitation tax credits, as specified. The bill would require an adaptive reuse project to meet specified affordability criteria. In this regard, the bill would require an adaptive reuse project for rental housing to include either 8% of the unit for very low income households and 5% of the units for extremely low income households or 15% of the units for lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project for owner-occupied housing, the bill would require the development to offer either 30% of the units at an affordable housing cost to moderate-income households or 15% of the units at an affordable housing cost to lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project including mixed uses, the bill would require at least one-half of the square footage of the adaptive reuse project to be dedicated to residential uses. The bill would prohibit an adaptive reuse project from being permitted in industrial zones that do not permit residential uses. The bill would provide, among other things relating to projects involving adaptive reuse, that parking is not required for the portion of a project consisting of a building subject to adaptive reuse that does not have existing onsite parking. The bill would authorize an adaptive reuse project subject to these provisions to include the development of new residential or mixed-use structures on undeveloped areas and parking areas located on the same parcel as the proposed repurposed building, or on the parcels adjacent to the proposed adaptive reuse project site if certain conditions are met. The bill would subject an adaptive reuse project approved by a local government pursuant to these provisions to specified labor standards, including certain labor prevailing wage, apprenticeship, skilled and training workforce, and health care expenditure requirements, and would require development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury. By requiring certain development proponents of an adaptive reuse project to sign an affidavit regarding the preservation of historic resources and requiring development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a local government to adopt an ordinance, as specified, to, among other things, specify the process and requirements applicable to adaptive reuse projects, as specified, and would require an adaptive reuse project to comply with all objective planning standards found in the ordinance. The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions relating to adaptive reuse projects is intended to preempt the adoption and implementation of a local ordinance that provides alternative procedures and substantive requirements for adaptive reuse projects, provided that the local ordinance does not prohibit an applicant from electing to pursue an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would require a local agency that has not adopted an above-described ordinance to ministerially without discretionary review approve or disapprove applications for a permit to create or serve an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would, if a local government's planning director or equivalent position determines that the adaptive reuse project submitted pursuant to these provisions is consistent with the objective planning standards, require the local government to approve the adaptive reuse project within specified timeframes. The bill would require the local government staff or relevant local planning and permitting department, upon determining that the adaptive reuse project is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards, to provide the proponent written documentation of, among other things, which standard or standards the development conflicts with within specific timeframes. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any local development standard on any project that is an adaptive reuse that would require alteration of the existing building envelope, except as specified, whether or not the local government has adopted an ordinance. By requiring local governments to implement the streamlined, ministerial review process for adaptive reuse projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, exempt an adaptive reuse project from all impact fees that are not reasonably related to the impacts resulting from the change of use of the site from nonresidential to residential or mixed use and would require any fees charged to be roughly proportional to the difference in impacts caused by the change of use. This bill would authorize a city or county, or city and county, commencing in the 2026–27 fiscal year, to establish an adaptive reuse investment incentive program to pay adaptive reuse investment incentive funds to the proponent of an adaptive reuse project approved pursuant to the streamlined, ministerial process described above for up to 30 consecutive fiscal years, as specified. The bill would define "adaptive reuse investment incentive funds" to mean an amount up to or equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the participating local agency from the taxation of that portion of the total assessed value of the real and personal property of an adaptive reuse project property that is in excess of the qualified adaptive reuse project property's valuation at the time of the proponent's initial request for funding. The bill would define various other terms for these purposes, and would make findings and declarations related to its provisions. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026. (2) Existing law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the streamlined, ministerial review process described above, would exempt the approval of adaptive reuse projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The bill would also exempt specified findings regarding industrial uses and ordinances adopted to implement specified provisions from CEQA. (3) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that a city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws. This bill would make corrections to a housing law cross-reference relating to the adaptive reuse project process established by the bill, thereby making a violation of that adaptive reuse project process by a city, county, or city and county subject to the above-described notification requirements. (4) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, requires a public agency to determine whether an application for a development project is complete within specified time periods, as specified. The act requires a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove that project within specified time periods. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, among other things, authorizes the governing body of a city, county, or city and county to proclaim a local emergency under certain circumstances, as specified, and grants political subdivisions various powers and authorities in periods of local emergency. This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to approve or deny a complete application, within 10 business days of receipt of the application, for a building permit or an equivalent permit for any of the specified structures intended to be used by a person until the rebuilding or repair of an affected property is complete. By imposing new duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
