Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, authorizes specified persons, including a person with whom the respondent resides, family members, and first responders, among others, to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. This bill would authorize a first responder to contact the county behavioral health agency in the county in which the individual resides or is found to request the agency file a petition to commence the CARE process. The bill would require the agency to review the request and determine whether to file a petition within 30 business days. The bill would require the agency, upon completion of the review, to notify the first responder that made the referral of specified information, including whether or not a petition was filed. Because the bill would require a higher level of service from county agencies, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the department to create a referral form to be used by the first responders and would require the department to issue guidance on the procedure to request that the agency file a petition to commence the CARE process. The bill would also require the agency to include specified data in their annual report to the department. 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 requires, by December 31, 2026, the State Air Resources Board, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, as provided, to develop a framework for measuring the average carbon intensity of the materials used in the construction of new buildings, including those for residential uses. Existing law requires, by December 31, 2028, the state board to develop a comprehensive strategy for the state's building sector to achieve a 40% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of building materials, as specified, as soon as possible, but no later than December 31, 2035. Existing law authorizes the state board to establish an embodied carbon trading system, as defined, in compliance with these requirements, as provided. This bill would require the state board to determine whether using building materials with lower embodied carbon would be cost effective during the first 2-year period of their use compared to using conventional building materials before implementing the above-described provisions. If the state board determines that using building materials with lower embodied carbon would not be cost effective during the first 2-year period of their use compared to using conventional building materials, the bill would require the state board to delay or suspend, as applicable, implementation of those provisions for not less than 5 years, not to exceed 10 years in total.
The Planning and Zoning law requires each planning agency to prepare and the legislative body of each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city that includes specified elements, including a housing element. The law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to designate jurisdictions as prohousing, as specified. The law requires that jurisdictions that have adopted a housing element that has been found by the department to be in substantial compliance with specified requirements and that have been designated as prohousing based on their adoption of prohousing local policies, as defined, be awarded additional points or preference in the scoring of program applications for certain programs. Existing law authorizes the legislative body of a city or county to designate a proposed enhanced infrastructure financing district to finance public capital facilities or other specified projects of communitywide significance that provide significant benefits to the district or the surrounding community, including, among other things, the acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for persons of very low, low, and moderate income for rent or purchase, as specified. Existing law authorizes an infrastructure financing plan to contain a provision for the division of taxes levied upon taxable property in the area included within the district, and authorizes the public financing authority of the district to issue bonds, as provided. This bill would authorize a city or county that is designated as prohousing to establish a prohousing enhanced infrastructure financing district if certain requirements are met, as specified. The bill would prescribe requirements applicable to those districts. The bill would expand the definition of "prohousing local policies" for purposes of the above-described provisions to include the establishment of one of these districts, and would require that the jurisdiction that established, and projects located within, a district receive enhanced points or preference than the baseline provided to other prohousing jurisdictions.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, contains various provisions requiring a local government that receives an application for certain types of qualified housing developments to review the application under a streamlined, ministerial approval process, depending on the type of housing development, as specified. Existing law, 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, and the modification thereof. The act generally requires a subdivider to file a tentative map or vesting tentative map with the local agency, as specified, and the local agency, in turn, to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the map within a specified time period. Existing law, known as the Starter Home Revitalization Act of 2021, among other things, requires a local agency to ministerially consider, without discretionary review or a hearing, a parcel map or a tentative and final map for a housing development project that meets certain requirements, including that the housing development project on the lot proposed to be subdivided will contain 10 or fewer residential units, except as provided. 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. This bill, the Missing Middle Townhome Ownership Act, would authorize a development proponent to submit an application for a townhome development project that is subject to a prescribed ministerial approval process if the development complies with certain procedural requirements and satisfies specified objective planning standards. The bill would also require a local agency to ministerially consider, without discretionary review or a hearing, a tentative and final map for a townhome development project that meets specified requirements, including that the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements established by the bill for ministerial approval of a townhome development project, as described in the preceding sentence, and that the newly created parcels are no smaller than 600 square feet. The act would define "townhome" for these purposes to mean a single-family dwelling unit that is less than or equal to 3 stories of occupiable square footage and either shares a common wall, as specified, or is separated from one or more neighboring units by no more than a specified fire separation distance, and would define "townhome development project" to mean a housing development project that consists entirely of residential units that satisfy this definition of townhome and meets prescribed density requirements, size requirements, and unit limits. The bill would authorize a local agency to disapprove a townhome development project, or deny the issuance of a tentative map or a final map for a townhome development project, allowed under the bill's provisions if it makes written findings based upon a preponderance of the evidence that the proposed townhome development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as provided in specified law, upon public health and safety and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The bill would authorize a local agency to adopt an ordinance to implement its provisions and would provide that the adoption of such an ordinance is not a project under CEQA. By establishing new ministerial approval processes relating to townhome development projects, as described above, this bill would expand the scope of the exemption from CEQA for ministerial projects. Further, by adding to the duties of local officials with respect to the review and approval of townhome development projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would exempt the City and County of San Francisco from its provisions. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City and County of San Francisco. 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, except as provided. 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, in modified conformity with federal income tax laws, establishes a low-income housing tax credit program through which the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee allocates low-income housing tax credits aimed at providing affordable low-income housing within and throughout the state. Existing federal law sets limitations and guidelines regarding what projects are eligible for credits, including a requirement that an extended low-income housing commitment is in effect, and a prohibition against eviction except for good cause. This bill would specify, for housing projects where the low-income housing commitment requires 100% of the units, not including any manager's units, to be restricted to lower income households, as defined, that good cause for nonrenewal of a lease includes cases where the nonrenewal relates to a household whose income exceeds 140% of the area median income for at least 2 consecutive years and 30% of the household's monthly income exceeds the fair market rent, determined as specified. The bill would require an owner to provide notice of the potential of good cause for nonrenewal described above if the household's income exceeds 140% of the area median income during any income certification, as specified. The bill would also require an owner electing to not renew a lease as described above to issue a notice of nonrenewal describing the basis of good cause for nonrenewal at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the lease, as specified.
Existing law authorizes a borrower who is experiencing financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on a specified residential mortgage loan due directly to a specified state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor, or a specified federally declared disaster, to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan, as prescribed. Existing law requires a mortgage servicer, except as specified, to offer mortgage payment forbearance for an initial 90-day period that may be extended up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months and prohibits a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would, among other things, similarly authorize a borrower to request forbearance on a residential mortgage loan, as defined, secured by residential real property that has become uninhabitable as a direct result of a disaster, which the bill would define to mean the conditions described in a declaration of a disaster issued by the federal government. The bill would require the borrower to affirm that as a direct result of a disaster, a residential unit is uninhabitable. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, require a mortgage servicer to offer mortgage payment forbearance of a period of up to an initial 180 days, to be extended at the request of the borrower in 90-day increments, up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months. The bill would provide that the forbearance period includes any period of forbearance related to the disaster that a mortgage servicer has provided to a borrower before the date upon which a declaration of a disaster was issued. The bill would also prohibit a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. This bill would require a mortgage servicer to report the credit obligations of borrowers under a disaster-related forbearance plan in compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. For an account granted disaster-related mortgage payment relief, the bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer from furnishing information during the forbearance period indicating that the payments are in forbearance and would require the mortgage servicer to report the credit obligation or account as current. This bill would authorize a civil action to enforce these provisions to be brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, or a county counsel. 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 property tax law provides, pursuant to a requirement of the California Constitution, that the property tax base year value of real property that is substantially damaged or destroyed by a disaster, as declared by the Governor, may be transferred to a comparable property located within the same county that is acquired or newly constructed, or to replacement property reconstructed on the site of the damaged or destroyed property, within 5 years after the disaster as a replacement property. This bill would authorize the county board of supervisors of any county proclaimed by the Governor to be in a state of emergency, or otherwise determined or declared by the Governor to be in a state of disaster, on or after January 1, 2026, but before January 1, 2031, to extend both of the above-described time periods to transfer by up to 3 years. The bill would apply to the determination of base year values for lien dates occurring on or after January 1, 2026, and before January 1, 2034. 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 the Department of Housing and Community Development, through its Office of Migrant Services, to assist in the development, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or operation of migrant farm labor centers and authorizes the Director of Housing and Community Development to contract with school districts, housing authorities, health agencies, and other appropriate local public and private nonprofit agencies for the procurement or construction of housing or shelter and to obtain services for migratory agricultural workers. Existing law establishes the Napa County Farmworker Centers Account to be administered by the department, as specified, to assist in the financing, maintenance, and operation of the Napa County Housing Authority's Farmworker Centers for year-round use by migrant and nonmigrant farm labor employees. Existing law requires the department to award, annually, up to $250,000 in matching funds to the Napa County Housing Authority upon demonstration that the Napa County Housing Authority is capable of continuing to effectively serve the housing needs of migrant or other farmworkers in the County of Napa and requires the Napa County Housing Authority, to be eligible for funding, to provide equal or greater funds from local sources. Existing law requires the department to use funds allocated from the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, as provided. This bill would instead require the department to award, annually, up to $500,000 in matching funds to the Napa County Housing Authority upon demonstration that the Napa County Housing Authority is capable of continuing to effectively serve the housing needs of migrant or other farmworkers in the County of Napa. The bill would require all funds awarded under its provisions to comply with specified prohibitions against state funding, loans, grants, or other state subsidies for an employer that employs certain workers, as provided, and would require that employer to reimburse the state or state agency that provided the funding, as provided. The bill would, instead of requiring the department to use specified funds allocated from the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, provide that this bill is not operative until funding is appropriated by the Legislature in the Budget Act or any other measure for the purposes of the bill. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Napa.
Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act (CARE Act) , authorizes specified persons, including a person with whom the respondent resides, family members, and first responders, among others, to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, or bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use to file a CARE process petition with the court and any other forms necessary for the CARE process, to be signed under the penalty of perjury, and requires the form to contain certain information, including either a specified affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional or evidence the respondent was detained for a minimum of two intensive treatments pursuant to specified provisions of law. Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS Act) , generally provides for the evaluation, treatment, and civil commitment of persons with mental health disorders and other specified persons. Existing law authorizes, under a superior court order, an evaluation of a person alleged, as a result of mental disorder, to be a danger to themselves or others or to be gravely disabled, and provides the forms to use for these evaluations. The CARE Act authorizes a court to terminate a respondent's participation in the CARE process if the court determines that the respondent is not participating in the CARE process or is not adhering to their CARE plan, as specified, and authorizes the court to order the court-ordered evaluation under the LPS Act. If the court finds the petitioner has made a prima facie showing that the respondent is, or may be, a person eligible for the CARE program, the court is required to order the county behavioral health agency, or their designee, as specified, to submit a written report to the court with specified information, including, but not limited to, a determination whether the respondent meets, or is likely to meet, the criteria for the CARE process and conclusions and recommendations about the respondent's ability to voluntarily engage in services. Existing law requires the court to, within 5 days of receiving the report, take one of several actions, including dismissing the petition if the court determines that voluntary engagement with the respondent is effective and the individual has enrolled, or is likely to enroll, in behavioral health treatment. This bill would require the written report to include conclusions about whether the respondent is likely to need a higher level of care than is available under the CARE Act and, if so, recommendations about the appropriate level of care and the necessary steps to obtain that level of care for the respondent and remove the authorization for a court to dismiss the petition if the respondent is only likely to enroll in behavioral health treatment. If the court intends to dismiss a petition because the respondent needs a higher level of services, the bill would authorize the court to order the county to conduct a prepetition screening and hold the CARE petition open until the screening is complete. The bill would also make other technical and conforming changes. By requiring a higher level of service on the county, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires all hearings regarding these provisions to occur in person unless the court, in its discretion, allows a party or witness to appear remotely. This bill would require the court to allow the hearings to be held remotely, unless otherwise ordered by the court or demanded by the respondent. 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, the Governor's Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 2025, beginning July 1, 2026, eliminates the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency and instead establishes the Business and Consumer Services Agency and the California Housing and Homelessness Agency. The plan also, among other things, establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness as an independent entity within the California Housing and Homelessness Agency and renames the existing council as the California Interagency Executive Council on Homelessness, which it establishes within the California Interagency Council on Homelessness. Existing law requires the Interagency Council on Homelessness to set and measure progress toward goals to prevent and end homelessness among youth in California by setting specific, measurable goals aimed at preventing and ending homelessness among youth in the state, as provided. This bill would establish within the California Interagency Council on Homelessness the Office of Youth Homelessness Prevention (office) , with the mission of reducing youth homelessness in the state to functional zero, defined as the condition in which the number of youth experiencing homelessness does not exceed the capacity to provide youth with permanent housing. The bill would impose prescribed responsibilities on the office, including, by September 15, 2027, developing and overseeing the implementation of a comprehensive framework to reduce youth homelessness to functional zero containing specific and measurable goals, as provided. This bill would require the office, on or before December 15, 2027, to create and post on its internet website a publicly accessible dashboard tracking the office's progress toward these goals. The bill would require the office to consult with an advisory committee, as provided, and would require the Secretary of California Housing and Homelessness to appoint the members of the advisory committee by March 1, 2027. The bill would establish the Office of Youth Homelessness Prevention Fund and require that, upon appropriation, moneys deposited into the fund be made available to the council, as provided. The bill would require the office to submit a report on its progress toward achieving its goals to the Legislature and the council on or before December 15, 2027, and annually thereafter, as provided. This bill would make related findings and declarations.
