Land use: housing development approvals: timelines and processes.

Section 65952(b), (c)(1), and (c)(2) previously limited the shortened responsible agency timelines (45 days for local agencies, 90 days for state agencies like the Coastal Commission and water boards) to housing development projects 'described in paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65950' - meaning only those with EIRs meeting specific affordability conditions. The enrolled version removes this limitation, so the shortened timelines now apply to all housing development projects approved by a lead agency, including those under the general 180-day timeline in paragraph (1).

Section 65928(b)(1)(B) removed the inline cross-reference 'as that term is defined in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 65905.5' and a stray word 'project,' since the definition is now provided by the new Section 65928.6.

Section 65950(a)(2), (3), and (4) removed leftover phrases 'pursuant to subdivision (c). project' and 'pursuant to subdivision (c), project' that were drafting artifacts from prior amendments.

An empty subdivision (d) in Section 65950 was removed, and the following subdivision was relettered from the erroneous '(c)' back to '(c)' as the final subdivision of the section.

The provision requiring the Director of Housing and Community Development to establish a working group (with equal representation from local governments, developers, and housing advocates) to recommend ways to expedite housing development was entirely removed. This was former Section 50411 of the Health and Safety Code.

Government Code Section 65928 was amended to explicitly include housing development projects within the definition of 'development project' even when the permitting process is ministerial, and to exclude postentitlement phase permits.

New Government Code Section 65928.6 defines 'housing development project' for purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act by cross-referencing the definition in Section 65905.5(b)(3).

New Government Code Section 65952 establishes deadlines for responsible agencies (agencies other than the lead agency that must also approve a project). General projects get 180 days. Housing development projects under the expedited tracks get 45 days from lead agency approval or receipt of a complete application, whichever is longer.

Section 65952 provides 90-day deadlines (instead of 45) when the responsible agency is the California Coastal Commission, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the State Water Resources Control Board, or a Regional Water Quality Control Board for housing development projects in the expedited tracks.

Section 65952 provides that when a lead agency's disapproval becomes final, any applications filed with responsible agencies for that project are deemed withdrawn.

Throughout Section 65950, references to 'development project' in the housing-specific paragraphs were changed to 'housing development project' for clarity and consistency with the new definitional section.

The approval or disapproval deadline for a housing development project with an EIR prepared under Public Resources Code Section 21100 or 21151 was changed from 60 days back to 90 days from the date of certification by the lead agency.

The bill digest removed the statement that the bill would reduce the timeline for a housing development project from 90 days to 60 days, reflecting the reversion in the operative text.

A new empty Section 3 was inserted, and the existing no-reimbursement clause was renumbered from Section 3 to Section 2.

Amendments to Government Code Section 65589.5 (Housing Accountability Act) were entirely removed from the bill, including the prohibition on overturning previously approved plans, entitlements, or permits by a subsequent agency.

Amendments to Government Code Section 65589.9 were removed from the bill.

The new Government Code Section 65943.3 was removed from the bill.

The bill's overall scope was reduced from amending three Government Code sections and adding two new sections to amending only one Government Code section (65950) and adding one Health and Safety Code section (50411).

The requirement for cities and counties with populations of 250,000 or more to assign a project development director to projects expected to cost more than $10 million was removed.

Reduced approval timelines under the Permit Streamlining Act (from 90 days to 60 days, and in some cases to 30 days from EIR certification) were removed from the bill.

The 'housing development expediter' designation system, which would have required the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop benchmarks based on objective, measurable factors, was removed.

Additional points or preference in program scoring (including the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program) for jurisdictions designated as housing development expediters was removed.

The legislative counsel's digest now explicitly states that the bill reduces the approval or disapproval timeline for housing development projects from 90 days to 60 days from the date of EIR certification, in addition to a separate 30-day provision when certain conditions are met. Previously the digest only referenced the 30-day requirement without specifying the 90-to-60 day reduction.

Added language to section (4) of the digest stating 'By imposing additional duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.' This is a legally significant statement that triggers potential reimbursement obligations under the California Constitution for costs imposed on local governments.

In the description of protections against overturning prior approvals, 'a subsequent utility or agency' was changed to 'a subsequent agency,' removing the specific reference to utilities as entities that could overturn prior development approvals.

The digest's description of the Permit Streamlining Act was expanded to note that it 'sets forth various procedures for the review and approval of development project applications' beyond just timelines, providing broader context for the bill's changes.

The department's housing development expediter benchmark must now be based on 'specific, objective, measurable factors,' adding a constraint on how the state defines which jurisdictions qualify for bonus points in program scoring.

If a project development director can no longer fulfill responsibilities for reasons outside the local jurisdiction's control, the jurisdiction must do everything in its power to assign a replacement as soon as possible. This addresses continuity of oversight for large housing projects over $10 million.

The 30-day approval or disapproval requirement after EIR certification is now explicitly limited to 'housing development projects' (as defined), rather than applying more broadly. Similarly, the reduced timelines under the Permit Streamlining Act are now scoped to housing development projects as defined and specified.

The prohibition on a subsequent agency overturning or revising a previously approved plan, entitlement, or permit now includes an exception ('and except as specified'), suggesting new carve-outs were added elsewhere in the bill that allow certain revisions even without a material change by the development proponent.