Existing property tax law, pursuant to constitutional authorization, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. That law provides a partial welfare exemption in the case of residential rental property used for lower income households, as specified, calculated as that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving lower income households represents of the total number of residential units. This bill would provide a partial welfare exemption in the case of certain residential rental property used for low- and moderate-income households. The partial exemption would be equal to that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving low- and moderate-income households, as defined, represents of the total number of residential units, as provided. The bill would require an owner to make specified certifications relating to the use of the property. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, and by expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. 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. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
Existing law requires a housing development project to be an allowed use as a transit-oriented housing development on any site zoned for residential, mixed, or commercial development within prescribed distances of a transit-oriented development stop if the development complies with specified requirements. Existing law applies these provisions to a local agency beginning July 1, 2026, unless the local agency adopts an ordinance or local transit-oriented development alternative plan, as specified. Existing law prescribes requirements for these plans, including requiring that the plan not reduce the capacity in any transit-oriented development zone in total units or residential floor area by more than 50%. Existing law defines various terms for these purposes. This bill would provide that a transit-oriented development alternative plan may reduce the capacity in up to one transit-oriented development zone in total units or residential floor area by more than 50% if certain requirements are met. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65912.161 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2576 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2576 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
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 to 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. This bill, the Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026 (Act) , would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property, as defined, from initiating or continuing an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant whose income, ability to obtain income, or financial support is impacted by immigration enforcement activities until no sooner than 90 days after the tenant or household member's detention-related hardship ends, as specified. The bill would require a court to stay the proceeding of a pending unlawful detainer action against a covered tenant if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the tenant provides the court with specified documentation, such as a signed declaration of detention-related hardship that includes a specified statement, that the tenant or household member suffered a detention-related hardship that prevented them from paying the unpaid rent alleged in the unlawful detainer action. Any person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration of detention-related hardship would be subject to a civil fine of up to $1,500. Under the bill, if a tenant has raised detention-related hardship as an affirmative defense, an owner of residential real property may request an evidentiary hearing regarding the tenant's detention-related hardship stay of the unlawful detainer action, at which the tenant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence their detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit the owner from charging or collecting any late fees, interest, or other penalties related to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant subject to these provisions. Within 90 days after the end of the detention-related hardship, the bill would require the tenant to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. For purposes of the Act, this bill would define "immigration enforcement activities" to include any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal immigration law, including any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would define "detention-related hardship" to mean, among other things, loss of income or financial support by the tenant or household member due to detention, arrest, or ordered removal of a tenant or household member by any federal law enforcement agency. This bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant subject to these provisions fees assessed for the late payment of that rental debt. The bill would prohibit a person from selling or assigning any unpaid debt as a result of detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit a housing provider or tenant screening company from using an alleged debt as a result of detention-related hardship as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating a prospective housing application or as the basis for refusing to rent a dwelling unit to an otherwise qualified prospective tenant. The bill would delete similar provisions related to debts as a result of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would require the Judicial Council to review its existing forms and develop new forms to effectuate these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030.
Existing law authorizes a borrower to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan for a period of 12 months if, among other things, the borrower affirms that they are experiencing financial hardship that prevents them from making timely payments on the loan due directly to the wildfire disaster described in the proclamation of a state of emergency issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on January 7, 2025, or the federally declared disaster, declared on January 8, 2025, related to the Eaton Wildfire, the Palisades Fire, and the Straight-line Winds. Existing law requires an applicant requesting forbearance on their residential mortgage loan to affirm that they are experiencing a financial hardship due to the wildfire disaster. Existing law requires that request to be made before the earlier of either 6 months after the date upon which the state of emergency is terminated or January 7, 2027. Existing law requires a borrower to be notified by the mortgage servicer within 10 business days whether their request for forbearance has been approved. Existing law prohibits any late fees from being assessed to the borrower's account during the period of forbearance, and the borrower from being charged a default rate of interest. This bill would extend the period of mortgage forbearance to 24 months and extend the latest possible deadline for a borrower's request for forbearance to January 7, 2029. The bill would require an applicant requesting forbearance on their residential mortgage loan to further affirm that the property securing the loan is uninhabitable due to the wildfire disaster. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. If the borrower has requested an extension of a forbearance period that would result in a total forbearance period of more than 12 months, the bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to request certain related documentation from the borrower, as specified. The bill would extend the amount of time the mortgage servicer has to notify the borrower whether their request for forbearance has been approved to 21 days or longer, as specified. During the period in which the borrower is waiting to be notified, the bill would prohibit any late fees from being assessed to the borrower's account, and the borrower from being charged a default rate of interest. Existing law requires a mortgage servicer to disclose to a borrower to whom a forbearance has been granted that the forborne mortgage payments are required to be repaid. Existing law prohibits requiring a borrower who was current on the residential mortgage loan when they entered forbearance to make a lump sum payment. This bill would require a mortgage servicer to offer the borrower the option to defer repayment of forborne amounts to the end of the loan term, as specified. 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 measure would urge the Governor, relevant state agencies, and all local governments to adopt an urgent and coordinated approach to end and prevent unsheltered homelessness statewide, as specified.
Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. Existing law authorizes a local agency to be responsible for the enforcement of certain requirements governing mobilehome parks. This bill would specify that, in the event that a mobilehome park operator, owner, or management fails to, or elects not to, comply with federal law or other federal requirements imposed in connection with a federally approved housing program, the mobilehome park operator, owner, or management shall ensure ongoing compliance with the Mobilehome Residency Law, the prescribed provisions of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and all other applicable state and local laws and ordinances. If a mobilehome park operator, owner, or management fails to, or elects not to, conduct the age verification requirement under prescribed federal law, the bill would authorize a local agency to conduct age verification, as provided, and grant the local agency with the right to access and inspect records of the mobilehome park operator, owner, and management to conduct that verification.
(1) Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development (the department) and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing, including mobilehome parks, as defined. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires, before the conversion of a mobilehome park to another use, except as specified, or before closure of a mobilehome park or cessation of use of the land as a mobilehome park, the person or entity proposing the change in use to file a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use of the mobilehome park. Existing law requires the impact report to include a replacement and relocation plan that adequately mitigates the impact upon the ability of the displaced residents of the mobilehome park to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park. Existing law requires the report, if a closure, cessation, or change of use is the result of damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, as defined, to include a technical service inspection report from the department that identifies the observed conditions within the park. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, governs the terms and conditions of residency in mobilehome parks. Existing law requires management, as defined, of a mobilehome park to offer the previous homeowner a right of first refusal to a renewed tenancy in the park if the park is destroyed due to a wildfire or other natural disaster and management elects to rebuild the park in the same location. Existing law, when a mobilehome tenancy is terminated due to damage or the destruction of the mobilehome park or any space as a result of a disaster, as defined, requires management to return to the homeowner any advance rental payments received from the homeowner that cover any period of time after the date of the termination, and discharges the homeowner's obligation to pay rent during any period that a homeowner is unable to occupy their mobilehome or mobilehome space due to a mandatory evacuation order pursuant to a disaster. This bill would require management to make a good faith effort to provide written status updates once per week for the first 4 weeks after a park is damaged by a disaster, resulting in one or more mobilehome units being rendered inaccessible to an existing mobilehome resident, and monthly thereafter until each displaced resident is allowed to return to occupying their mobilehome site or the mobilehome park receives final approval of a change of use, cessation of use, or closure, to the displaced residents of the park, as provided. The bill would prohibit management from restricting a resident of the park from accessing their mobilehome or mobilehome site during regular business hours to collect belongings or inspect damage to their mobilehome on any date later than 7 days after evacuation orders are officially lifted or downgraded by the local governing authority to resident-access only and would require any waiver of liability distributed by management to be limited to immunity for harm resulting from the resident accessing the mobilehome, mobilehome site, or mobilehome park. This bill would require management, before initiating or while pursuing a change of use, cessation of use, or closure related to damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, to at least reasonably evaluate the known and estimated costs for rebuilding and reopening the park and identify all potential resources from a list maintained by the department. The bill would require the department to maintain a list of mobilehome-related programs and opportunities that could support rehabilitation or rebuilding of a mobilehome park affected by a disaster declaration and require the department to make the list available on the department's internet website. The bill would require management to submit documentation demonstrating completion of those evaluations and investigations to the department, the local jurisdiction in which the park is situated, and the residents of the mobilehome park, and would prohibit the department and that local jurisdiction from issuing or amending specified approvals and permits to management until that documentation has been submitted. By placing new requirements on local jurisdictions in which mobilehome parks are situated, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize a jurisdiction with enforcement power to require debris removal and specified testing if a mobilehome park is damaged or destroyed in a disaster resulting in one or more mobilehome units being rendered inaccessible to an existing mobilehome resident, as provided. The bill would authorize a resident organization, a displaced resident of the mobilehome park, or a public attorney, as specified, to bring an action against management that willfully violates these provisions, as provided. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, before the approval of any change of use of the mobilehome park, to review the report and any additional relevant documentation and make specified findings regarding the effect on housing opportunities within the local jurisdiction. The bill would additionally provide that before the approval of any change of use the legislative body shall review documentation compliance with the specified evaluations and investigations required by the bill, and that management shall not receive approval of any change of use by the legislative body if management fails to submit that documentation. The Planning and Zoning Law also requires a legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, before the approval of any change of use of the mobilehome park, to make a finding as to whether or not approval of the park closure and the park's conversion into its intended new use will result in or materially contribute to a shortage of housing opportunities and choices for low- and moderate-income households within the local jurisdiction. This bill would also require that finding to consider the costs of closure or conversion to the residents of the park for which closure or conversion is sought. By placing new requirements on local legislative bodies when approving a change of use for mobilehome parks, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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. (4) 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 within the city or county with a density bonus, waivers or reductions of development standards, parking ratios, and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct certain types of housing, including, among other types of housing, housing that will include specified percentages of units for rental or sale to lower income households or very low income households, as specified. Existing law requires a city or county to grant incentives or concessions requested by an applicant for a density bonus except under prescribed circumstances. Existing law defines "incentives or concessions" to include, among other things, a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards, as specified, and regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city or county that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs, as specified. This bill would exclude, for buildings over 85 feet in height above grade, a reduction in site development standards, a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, and other regulatory incentives or concessions that include or relate to a labor standard, as defined, that have been adopted by the local government entity from the definition of "incentives or concessions." The bill would provide that, for purposes of these provisions, the applicable labor standards are those that do not exceed certain statutory requirements, as specified, as those requirements existed on December 31, 2025. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2433, AB 2480, or both, to be operative only if this bill and AB 2433, AB 2480, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires a housing development project to be an allowed use as a transit-oriented housing development if certain requirements are met. Existing law provides that these provisions do not apply to a local agency until July 1, 2026, unless the local agency takes specified actions. Existing law defines various terms for these purposes. Existing law prohibits a local government from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project is seeking approval as a transit-oriented housing development, as specified. This bill would additionally prohibit a local government with an existing or planned transit-oriented development stop from taking specified actions with respect to transit agencies and transit projects.
This Senate Resolution recognizes the importance of affordable homeownership for economic stability and racial equity in California, particularly for lower-income families and communities of color. It highlights how nonprofit-led programs like Habitat for Humanity provide long-term affordability through mechanisms such as deed restrictions and shared equity while engaging local volunteers and strengthening neighborhoods. The resolution calls attention to California's low homeownership rate and housing shortage, urging state officials to prioritize affordable home supply in their policies and budget decisions.
