Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city and county, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property. This bill would, beginning January 1, 2027, prohibit a local jurisdiction, defined to include a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county, from collecting a transfer tax, as defined, levied on the sale or transfer of a real property interest conveyed if the combined transfer tax rate levied by the local jurisdiction exceeds 1.5% of the consideration paid for or value of the real property interest conveyed, except as otherwise provided. The bill would also prohibit a local jurisdiction from levying a transfer tax on the first sale of single-family housing property occurring within 5 years of one or more housing units on the real property being destroyed or made uninhabitable by a natural disaster, as defined. By imposing new duties upon local officials with respect to transfer taxes, 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, 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.
(1) Existing law, known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, with respect to land where housing is an allowable use and except as specified, prohibits a county or city, including the electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, in which specified conditions exist, determined as provided by the Department of Housing and Community Development, from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition, as defined, that would have certain effects. Under existing law, these proscribed policies, standards, or conditions include, among others, (A) changing the land use designation or zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing zoning district below what was allowed under the general plan or specific plan land use designation and zoning ordinances of the county or city as in effect on January 1, 2018, and (B) imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing development within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the county or city, except as provided. Existing law states that these prohibitions apply to any zoning ordinance adopted or amended on or after the effective date of these provisions, and that any development policy, standard, or condition on or after that date that does not comply is deemed void. Existing law prohibits a county or city subject to these provisions from enforcing a zoning ordinance imposing a moratorium or other similar restriction on or limitation of housing development until it has submitted the ordinance to, and received approval from, the Department of Housing and Community Development. Existing law requires the department to approve a zoning ordinance submitted to it only if the department determines that the zoning ordinance satisfies these requirements. If the department denies approval of the zoning ordinance, as specified, existing law states that the ordinance is deemed void. This bill would expand the prohibition against enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that has the effect of imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing development within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the county or city to also prohibit these policies, standards, or conditions within the sphere of influence of a city, as defined. The bill would define "moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development" for purposes of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to include, but not be limited to, the electorate of a county or city subject to these provisions from exercising its referendum power in a manner that has the effect of extending an existing moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development. The bill would prohibit a county or city subject to these provisions from enforcing an initiative or referendum imposing a moratorium or other similar restriction on or limitation of housing development until the initiative or referendum receives approval from the department pursuant to the approval process described above. The bill would state that if the department denies approval of the initiative or referendum, as specified, the initiative or referendum would be deemed void. The bill would provide that these provisions do not preclude, limit the enforceability of, or require department approval of a referendum or an initiative that requires voter approval of a proposed general plan amendment that would increase the intensity of land use allowed on lands designated for open space, agricultural, or rural land uses in the operative general plan, as specified. Existing law defines "reducing the intensity of land use" for purposes of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to include reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations, or any other action that would individually or cumulatively reduce the site's residential development capacity. This bill would revise the definition of "reducing the intensity of land use" to mean any action that would individually or cumulatively reduce the site's residential development capacity, including reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations. This bill would also provide that an action or special proceeding brought to enforce these provisions is subject to a 3-year statute of limitations under specified law. The bill would provide that the bill's provisions apply retroactively to any pending action or proceeding. (2) 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. (3) By imposing new requirements and duties on local planning officials with respect to housing development, 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.
The California Financing Law (CFL) generally regulates consumer loan lending practices by finance lenders, brokers, and program administrators. The CFL makes a willful violation of its provisions a crime. This bill would prescribe requirements on loans provided to consumers for the purpose of advancing residential real property rent payments for certain finance lenders and servicers, including prohibiting more than 2 installment payments for the loans, specifying the amount that may be charged for late fees, prescribing disclosure requirements, and prohibiting advertising 0% APR for the loan unless specified conditions are met. By expanding the scope of a crime under the CFL, 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.
(1) Existing state and federal law provides for the enforcement of laws related to elections. This bill would prohibit a peace officer from interfering with the administration of an election, as specified. This bill would authorize certain persons to enforce those prohibitions by filing a civil action, as specified. This bill would also prohibit any individual from permitting an agent of a law enforcement agency, as specified, to access, disrupt, modify, or take possession of rosters, combined rosters, or voter lists unless authorized by a court order or to investigate certain types of voting fraud. The bill would additionally require the Attorney General to provide guidance and information regarding how to respond to requests by law enforcement, as defined, to access areas where ballots are present. (2) Existing law requires an elections official, upon receiving a vote by mail ballot, to compare the signature on the identification envelope with the voter's prior signatures, and it also provides a mechanism by which a voter can verify their signature and cure this defect. Existing law provides that the processing of vote by mail ballots is open to the public and permits specified persons and organizations to observe this processing. This bill would prohibit a vote by mail observer from challenging a signature on a vote by mail ballot that has been verified by the voter. (3) Under existing law, it is a crime for a person in possession of a firearm, a uniformed peace officer, private guard, or security personnel, or any person wearing the uniform of a peace officer, guard, or security personnel, to be stationed in the immediate vicinity of, or posted at, a polling place without authorization from the appropriate elections official. It is also a crime for a person to hire or arrange for such a person to be stationed in the immediate vicinity of, or posted at, a polling place without authorization from the elections official. This bill would authorize the Secretary of State or Attorney General to object to authorization provided by the appropriate elections official, in which case the person stationed or posted at the polling place, or the person who hired or arranged for such a person to be stationed or posted at the polling place, is guilty of a crime. By expanding the scope of these crimes, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law authorizes the Secretary of State, Attorney General, and any local elections official in the county in which the act occurs, to bring a civil action against an individual, business, or other legal entity that commits any specified act of tampering with a voting system or voting equipment before, during, or after an election. This bill would additionally authorize the Secretary of State, Attorney General, and the appropriate local elections official to bring a civil action against a person, business, or entity that takes a package containing ballots from the custody of an elections official. (5) Existing law makes it a crime for an individual to undertake a number of enumerated actions that would result in interference with an election, including displaying a container for the purpose of collecting ballots with the intent to deceive a voter into casting a ballot in an unofficial ballot box. This bill would also make it a crime to take a package containing voted ballots out of the custody of an elections official. By expanding the scope of this crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (6) Existing law requires the elections official of any county or city using a voting system to inspect the machines or devices at least once every 2 years. This bill would prohibit an individual from permitting an agent of a law enforcement agency, as defined, to access, disrupt, modify, or take possession of certified voting technology unless authorized by a court order. To the extent this bill would establish new procedures for the conduct of elections, it would create a state-mandated local program. (7) 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. (8) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, 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. Existing law defines, for its purposes, a housing development project as a use consisting of, among other things, mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses meeting one of several conditions, including that at least 23 of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use. This bill would revise the definition of "housing development project" to, in the case of mixed-use developments with at least 23 of the new or converted square footage designated for residential use, require that no portion of the project be designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except as specified. This bill would correct cross-references in the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1308 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1308 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to amend its general plan relative to the data and analysis contained in the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, as specified and to amend its zoning ordinance consistent with the general plan. Existing law prohibits the legislative body of a city or county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from entering into a development agreement for property that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress on construction of a flood protection system that will result in flood protection equal to or greater than the urban level of flood protection in urban or urbanizing areas intended to be protected by the system, which, except as provided, shall be achieved by 2025 for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees. Existing law similarly prohibits each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement that would result in the construction of a new building or construction that would result in an increase in allowed occupancy for an existing building, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. Existing law similarly requires the legislative body of each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to deny approval of a tentative map or a parcel map for a subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. This bill would include in the exceptions to the requirement that the urban level of flood protection be achieved for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees by 2025, specified areas located in the City of Marysville, the City of Sacramento, the County of Sacramento, the County of Sutter, and the County of Yuba that shall, instead, be required to achieve the urban level of flood protection by 2030. The bill would authorize the Department of Water Resources to require a city or county listed above to contribute its fair and reasonable share of any property damage caused by a flood in its respective jurisdiction, as specified, until the city or county finds the area has met the urban level of flood protection. The bill would make a related technical change. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Sacramento, County of Sutter, County of Yuba, City of Marysville, and City of Sacramento.
(1) Existing law, the Governor's Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 2025 (GRP) , which became effective on July 5, 2025, reorganized specified state agencies and departments, including establishing the Housing Development and Finance Executive Committee (executive committee) within the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency for the purpose of centralizing affordable housing finance policymaking across state government. The GRP requires the executive committee to, among other things, work to align state housing funding sources for the creation of a consolidated application for multifamily affordable housing developers and a coordinated review process for the application of funds. The GRP, beginning July 1, 2026, establishes the Housing Development and Finance Committee within the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, which the GRP also establishes, and transfers the executive committee to the Housing Development Finance Committee effective July 1, 2026. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that, in addition to the other duties required of the executive committee created by the GRP to align state housing funding sources, as described above, the executive committee be required to make recommendations to the Legislature regarding improvements the Department of Housing and Community Development may make to optimize loan administration, as specified. (2) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each 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. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, formerly known as the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development. This bill would require an annual report required by its provisions to be prepared using standards, forms, and definitions adopted by the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, except as specified. The bill would also make a nonsubstantive change to update a reference to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation in these provisions. (3) The Permit Streamlining Act establishes requirements for the review and approval of applications for development projects by public agencies. Existing law defines "development project" for purposes of those provisions to include a housing development project that requires an entitlement from a local agency. This bill would define "housing development project" for purposes of those provisions. (4) 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, for various purposes, including for the purpose of limiting certain exemptions from CEQA, defines "natural and protected lands" to mean sites located within specified locations, including, among other locations, lands protected as preserve areas or reserve lands, as provided. This bill would instead include in the definition of "natural and protected lands" for CEQA purposes lands that are identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan, as provided, or other adopted natural resource protection plan. (5) Existing law exempts from CEQA specified new agricultural employee housing projects and projects consisting exclusively of the repair or maintenance of an existing farmworker housing project. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change by amending and renumbering the above-described section of law. (6) CEQA exempts from its requirements housing projects that meet certain conditions. Under the exemption for housing projects, CEQA requires a local government to notify and consult, as specified, with each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site on the proposed project, as specified. For a development project exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption, existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, requires that a public agency that is the lead agency for the development project approve or disapprove the project within 30 days from the conclusion of the consultation process. Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) , among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving a housing development project that complies with applicable objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, or from imposing a condition that it be developed at a lower density, unless the local agency bases its decision on written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that specified conditions exist, as provided. When a local agency makes a decision as described above, existing law requires the local agency to provide the applicant documentation describing the reason for the decision within a specified time period. For a development project exempt from CEQA pursuant to the exemption for housing projects, this bill would instead require the public agency to approve or disapprove the project within 30 days from the later of the conclusion of the above-specified consultation process or the above-specified time period under the HAA. (7) Existing law, for a proposed housing development project that would otherwise be exempt from CEQA pursuant to a statutory exemption or specified categorical exemptions, but for a single condition, limits the application of CEQA to the effects upon the environment that are caused by that single condition, except as provided. This bill would exempt from that limited application of CEQA a housing development project that has a project site or parcel size that exceeds 4 acres, if the project is a builder's remedy project, as defined, and the project applicant applied, as specified. (8) Existing law exempts from CEQA any aspect of a housing development project, as defined, including any permits, approvals, or public improvements required for the housing development project, if the housing development project meets specified conditions, as provided. Existing law requires, as one of those conditions, that the project site or parcel size for a builder's remedy project, as defined, not be more than 5 acres. This bill would instead require, as part of those conditions, that the project site or parcel size for a builder's remedy project not be more than 4 acres. The bill would require, if a lead agency determines that CEQA does not apply to an activity pursuant to the above-described exemption and determines to approve or carry out the activity, the lead agency to file a notice of exemption with the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and the county clerk of the county in which the activity will occur, as specified. (9) This bill, notwithstanding exemptions from CEQA or the limited application of CEQA to housing development projects, would apply CEQA to a housing development project that meets specified criteria, including, among other things, that the project is located in a city with a population of more than 85,000 but less than 95,000, as determined by the 2020 Census, and a portion of the parcel where the project is located is within a regulatory floodway, as provided. (10) Existing law establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as specified. Existing law provides for the allocation of funding under the program among continuums of care, cities, counties, and tribes in 6 rounds, with rounds 1 to 5, inclusive, administered by the Interagency Council on Homelessness and round 6 administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as provided. Existing law establishes a round 7 of the program and states the intent of the Legislature to enact future legislation that specifies the parameters, as specified. Existing law, effective July 1, 2026, appropriates $500,000,000, as specified, provided that these funds be disbursed in accordance with specified requirements. Existing law authorizes the Department of Finance to augment Item 2240-001-001 of the Budget Act of 2025 by $8,000,000 to prepare to administer round 7 of the program. This bill would instead require the department, during fiscal year 2025–26, to prepare to administer round 7 of the program with the goal that initial round 7 disbursements will be available to grantees meeting the statutory provisions for disbursement beginning September 1, 2026, as specified. (11) This bill would appropriate the sum of $2,106,000 from the General Fund to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to support implementation of SB 131 (Chapter 24 of the Statutes of 2025) . (12) By increasing the duties of 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. (13) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
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.
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 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.
