Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or a county to establish an enhanced infrastructure financing district to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance, including the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for persons of very low, low, and moderate income. Existing law authorizes the City and County of San Francisco to establish a downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing district for the purpose of financing commercial-to-residential conversion projects with incremental tax revenues generated by commercial-to-residential conversion projects within the district. Existing law requires the City and County of San Francisco to establish a board for the district at the same time that it adopts the resolution of intention to form the district, and requires the district to prepare a downtown revitalization financing plan (financing plan) that includes specified information and requirements, including that the first distribution of incremental tax revenues distributed back to a commercial-to-residential conversion project commence with the fiscal year that begins after the project is issued a certificate of occupancy. Existing law, among other things, requires a district to establish a process for eligible commercial-to-residential conversion projects identified in the financing plan to opt into receiving incremental tax revenue generated by the respective project. Existing law specifies that the commercial-to-residential conversion projects that opt in to receive incremental tax revenue are public works for which prevailing wages are required to be paid, as specified, and requires the commercial-to-residential conversion projects that opt in to receiving incremental tax revenue to comply with labor standards adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco, as provided. This bill would additionally authorize any city, county, or city and county, except the City and County of San Francisco, to establish a downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing district for the purpose of financing specified commercial-to-residential conversion projects with incremental tax revenues generated by commercial-to-residential conversion projects within the district. The bill would require the district to meet the requirements imposed on the City and County of San Francisco when establishing a downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing district described above and would modify the required components of the district's proposed financing plan, as provided. The bill would make various conforming changes to the above-described provisions in this regard and would also make technical changes. This bill would further specify that, for purposes of the preparation of a financing plan, if the city, county, or city and county does not issue certificates of occupancy, the first distribution of incremental tax revenue to a commercial-to-residential conversion project shall be made with the fiscal year that begins after the project completes a final inspection. The bill would remove the requirement that commercial-to-residential conversion projects that opt in to receive incremental tax revenue comply with labor standards adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and would instead subject such projects to specified labor standards. Existing law requires a certain portion of any ad valorem property tax revenue annually allocated to the local government that is specified in the adopted financing plan, as described, to be allocated to and, when collected, apportioned to a special fund of the district for all lawful purposes of the district. Existing law also requires those revenues to be allocated and apportioned to the local government when the district ceases to exist pursuant to the financing plan. This bill would remove those provisions.
(1) 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, until January 1, 2033, deems a housing development project an allowable use on any real property owned by a local educational agency if the housing development satisfies specified conditions, including, among others, consisting of at least 10 housing units, 100% of the units being rented by local educational agency employees, local public employees, and general members of the public pursuant to a specified priority, and a majority of the units being deed restricted for lower income or moderate-income households, as specified. Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households unless the local agency makes written findings as to one of certain sets of conditions, as specified, and describes various requirements applicable to housing development projects. This bill would revise and recast the provisions deeming a housing development project an allowable use on any real property owned by a local educational agency. The bill would require the housing development to satisfy specified conditions, and would apply the requirements of the Housing Accountability Act to review of housing development projects subject to these provisions. The bill would provide that a proposed housing development project is eligible for a density bonus, as specified, and would define various terms for these purposes. The bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2036. (2) Existing law, prior to the sale, lease, or rental of any excess real property, requires the governing board of each school district to appoint a school district advisory committee to advise the governing board of the school district in the development of districtwide policies and procedures governing the use or disposition of school buildings or space in school buildings that is not needed for school purposes. Notwithstanding that law, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to elect not to appoint a school district advisory committee in the sale, lease, or rental of excess real property to be used for teacher or school district employee housing. This bill would specify that the governing board of a school district is authorized to elect not to appoint a school district advisory committee in the sale, lease, or rental of excess real property to be used for teacher or school district employee housing and that is subject to the provisions governing real property owned by a local educational agency described above. (3) 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 or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. Existing law, until January 1, 2033, exempts from CEQA certain actions taken by a public agency related to affordable housing projects, as defined, if certain requirements are met. This bill would provide that an affordable housing project for purposes of the CEQA exemption includes real property owned by a local educational agency, as described above, and would exempt these projects from certain of the requirements for other affordable housing projects. (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) By adding to the duties of local planning officials with respect to approving certain development projects, this 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.
Under the Planning and Zoning Law, the legislative body of a county or city may adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land, as provided. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency's processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps. Existing law requires a local agency to consider ministerially a specified proposed housing development or to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split if the development or parcel meets specified requirements, including, that the development or parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance, as specified. Existing law authorizes a local agency to impose specified objective standards on the development or parcel created by an urban lot split, except as specified. With respect to ministerial review of a proposed housing development under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to consider ministerially the development that is not located in either a contributing structure within a historic district included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance or in a parcel individually listed as a historical resource included in the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a property individually designated or listed as a city or county landmark under a city or county ordinance. The bill would also authorize a local agency to adopt objective standards for the purposes of maintaining the historical value of a historic district listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, as specified. With respect to an urban lot split under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to ministerially approve the urban lot split if the parcel is not located within a historic landmark property included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark pursuant to a city or county ordinance. The bill would additionally require that the proposed urban lot split not require demolition or alteration of specified structures. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this 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, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 (act) , until January 1, 2033, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for an affordable housing development or a mixed-income housing development that meets specified objective standards and affordability and site criteria, including being located within a zone where office, retail, or parking are a principally permitted use. The act makes a development that meets those objective standards and affordability and site criteria a use by right and subject to one of 2 streamlined, ministerial review processes depending on, among other things, the affordability requirements applicable to the project. The act requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to undertake at least 2 studies, one completed on or before January 1, 2027, and one completed on or before January 1, 2031, on the outcomes of the act. This bill would provide that, for purposes of determining whether a property or site satisfies the criteria, objective development standards, or other requirements for receiving streamlined, ministerial review under the act, a local government's review of the property or site is limited to the area described as being physically disturbed by construction in the application for streamlined, ministerial review and does not include, unless expressly stated otherwise, other contiguous or noncontiguous areas even if under the ownership or control of the project proponent. The bill would provide that easements for public right-of-way, public or private utilities, or other public improvements in, under, or over the property shall not make the property ineligible to receive streamlined, ministerial review for either affordable or mixed-income housing developments. This bill would also expand the eligibility for the above-described streamlined, ministerial review for mixed-income housing developments to include developments located in a campus development zone, as defined, as long as the development meets certain affordability requirements and objective standards, as provided. The bill would require the outcomes of projects built under campus development zones to be reported in the January 1, 2031, outcomes report. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. 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 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. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. By expanding the scope of projects eligible for streamlined, ministerial approval as described above, this bill would expand the scope of the exemption from CEQA for ministerial projects. Existing law includes certain setback requirements in the objective standards that a mixed-income development project must meet to be subject to the above-referenced streamlined, ministerial review process. In this regard, existing law requires all parking to be set back at least 25 feet. This bill would instead impose that setback requirement only on parking that is aboveground. By changing the criteria local agencies must follow for the approval of certain development projects, this 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, the Planning and Zoning 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 specified mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine whether the housing element is in substantial compliance with those provisions. Existing law requires the department to designate jurisdictions as prohousing pursuant to emergency regulations adopted by the department, as prescribed. Existing law requires that jurisdictions that are prohousing and that are in substantial compliance with specified provisions be awarded additional points or preference in the scoring of applications for specified state programs. Existing law defines "prohousing local policies" for these purposes and specifies a nonexhaustive list of examples of those policies, including local financial incentives for housing and adoption of zoning allowing for use by right for residential and mixed-use development. This bill would include in the definition of "prohousing local policies" policies that keep people housed, and would include additional examples of prohousing local policies under the above-described provisions, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.9 of the Government Code proposed by AB 36 to be operative only if this bill and AB 36 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(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 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 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 establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state and authorizes them to operate campuses and provide instruction to students. This bill would provide that a community college district is not required to comply with the zoning ordinances of a city, county, or city and county, for a university housing development project constructed on property owned or leased by a community college district if specific requirements are met. If the project includes units for faculty and staff, the bill would require the community college district to ensure that a portion of the units of the project are made available at affordable rents to extremely low income faculty and staff and lower income faculty and staff. 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.
Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, prohibits an owner of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as specified. This bill would, until January 20, 2029, enact the Social Security Tenant Protection Act of 2025 (the Act) . The Act would authorize a tenant of residential real property to assert Social Security hardship as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer proceeding based on the nonpayment of rent. The Act would define "Social Security hardship" as a loss of income due to an interruption in the payment of Social Security benefits due to the action or inaction of the federal government. The Act would require a tenant asserting Social Security hardship as an affirmative defense to provide, to the satisfaction of the court, evidence that Social Security payments typically received by the tenant's household have been terminated, delayed, or reduced due to no fault of the tenant and that the hardship prevented the tenant from paying the rent. If the tenant successfully provides this evidence, the Act would require the court to issue a stay of the unlawful detainer action, as specified. The Act would not relieve a tenant of their obligation to pay past due rent, and it would require a tenant, within 14 days of the Social Security benefits being restored, to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. If the tenant pays all past due rent or enters into a payment plan with the owner, the Act would require the court to either dismiss the unlawful detainer action with prejudice or set aside the judgment against all named and unnamed defendants in the action. The Act would further require the Judicial Council, by January 1, 2027, to adopt or modify forms as needed to implement the Act.
