Existing law provides that a trustee's sale of property under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust or mortgage on real property containing one to 4 residential units is not final until the earliest of various time periods. Existing law provides specified eligible bidders, defined to include eligible tenant buyers, prospective owner-occupants, and eligible nonprofit corporations with certain attributes, various rights in connection with those sales, and sets forth procedures for eligible bidders to submit bids after those sales. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General, a county counsel, a city attorney, or a district attorney to bring an action to enforce these provisions as specified. This bill would instead provide that a trustee's sale of eligible property, as defined, is not final until the earliest of various time periods. The bill would change the term "eligible tenant buyer" to "eligible tenant bidder," and would redefine the term "eligible bidder" to remove prospective owner-occupants and to mean an eligible tenant bidder or an eligible community bidder, as defined. The bill would add an additional attribute to the eligible nonprofit corporations portion of "eligible community bidder." The bill would authorize the persons described above to seek a civil penalty to enforce these provisions, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes.
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, until January 1, 2033, exempts from its requirements certain actions for affordable housing projects that meet specified requirements, including confirmation by a public agency that, among other things, the project site satisfies specified requirements and a vacant project site does not contain tribal cultural resources that could be affected by the development that were found pursuant to a consultation and the effects of which cannot be mitigated, as provided. This bill would extend the operation of the above-described exemption to January 1, 2037, and would expand the exemption to also include a public university or public college housing project, as defined, that meets specified requirements. Because the bill would extend the operation of the exemption and would increase duties on a lead agency related to the expansion of this exemption, 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.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a local agency or state agency to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information required from any applicant for a postentitlement phase permit, as defined. Existing law also establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant, and whether to approve or deny an application. Existing law requires the time limits to be tolled, if the local agency or state agency requires review of the application by an outside entity, until the outside entity completes the review and returns the application, as specified. This bill would prohibit a local agency or state agency from requiring or requesting more than 2 plan check and specification reviews in connection with an application for a building permit, as part of its review. The bill would authorize a local agency or state agency to deny an application that is not compliant with the permit standards following 2 plan check and specification reviews. The bill would also authorize an applicant to request additional submittals of applications that are not compliant with the permit standards. The bill, if a local agency or state agency finds that a complete application is noncompliant, would prohibit a local agency or state agency from requesting or requiring any action or inaction as a result of a building inspection undertaken to assess compliance with the applicable building permit standards that would represent a deviation from a previously approved building plan or similar approval for the building permit, except as specified. This bill would remove the above-described tolling requirements relating to outside entity reviews and, instead, would require, if federal or state law requires review of the application by another public agency that is independent of the local agency or state agency before the local agency or state agency is authorized to act on the application, the time limits to be tolled for the application until the public agency completes the review and returns the application to the local agency or state agency. The bill would require the local agency or state agency to notify the applicant of the tolling, as specified. (2) Existing law, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, requires a local agency or state agency to provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of the agency, as provided by that agency. Existing law requires the city or county to provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. Existing law requires a local agency or state agency to provide a final written determination on the appeal not later than 60 business days after receipt of the applicant's written appeal, for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer, and not later than 90 business days for a housing development projects with 26 units or more. Existing law also specifies that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. This bill would revise those timelines to not later than 30 business days for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer and 45 business days for housing development projects with 26 units or more. The bill would remove the specification that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. The bill would remove the requirement that, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, a local agency or state agency provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision to the director of the agency if there is no governing body, as provided by that agency. The bill would remove the requirement that a city or county provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. This bill would authorize the applicant to seek a writ of mandate to compel approval of the application, if the applicant's appeal is denied, or a decision on the appeal is not made within the timelines provided, or an appeals process is not provided as required. By imposing additional duties on local agencies regarding postentitlement phase permits, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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. The act also requires, when a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, that the local agency base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that 2 specified conditions exist. Existing law defines the term "disapprove the housing development project" for these purposes to include any instance in which a local agency takes certain actions or fails to comply with certain requirements, including the time limits described above. Existing law makes a local agency's failure to meet the above-described time limits relating to postentitlement phase permits a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would, instead, make a violation of the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits, among others, a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. The bill would also revise the definition of "disapprove the housing development project" under the Housing Accountability Act to include any instance in which a local agency fails to comply with any of the provisions described above relating to postentitlement phase permits. By requiring local agencies to take certain actions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The bill would make other conforming changes and would provide that certain changes are declaratory of existing law. (5) 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. (6) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by SB 1072 to be operative only if this bill and SB 1072 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law prohibits mobilehome park management from terminating a tenancy except for specified reasons, including, among other reasons, failure of the homeowner or resident to comply with a reasonable rule or regulation of the park that is part of the rental agreement. Existing law provides that an act or omission of a homeowner or resident does not constitute a failure to comply with a reasonable rule or regulation until management has given the homeowner written notice of the alleged rule or regulation violation and the homeowner or resident has failed to adhere to the rule or regulation within seven days. Existing law further provides these provisions do not relieve management from its obligations to demonstrate that a rule or regulation has in fact been violated. This bill would, instead, require that the management serve the homeowner with the written notice, as prescribed, and would require the notice to include the language of each rule or regulation for which the homeowner is alleged to be in violation, along with specific facts, as provided, and any action required to adhere to the rule or regulation. The bill would, instead, provide that these provisions do not relieve the management from its burden of demonstrating that a rule or regulation has in fact been in fact violated.
Existing law establishes the Multifamily Housing Program, administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, to provide financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development of specified types of housing projects. Existing law requires that specified funds appropriated to provide housing for individuals and families who are experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness and who are inherently impacted by or at increased risk for medical diseases or conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic or other communicable diseases be disbursed in accordance with the Multifamily Housing Program for specified uses, including acquisition or rehabilitation of motels, hotels, hostels, or other sites, as provided. This disbursement program is referred to as Homekey. Existing law, upon appropriation, requires Homekey awards to be expended within 8 months of the date of the award, as provided. This bill would, for Homekey awards made on or after July 1, 2026, require the department to consider allowing applicants that utilize funds for adaptive reuse projects if the adaptive reuse involves substantial rehabilitation, reconstruction, or demolition of an existing structure, as defined and specified.
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.
Existing law, the State Housing Law, establishes statewide construction and occupancy standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law requires the building department of every city or county to enforce within its jurisdiction all the provisions published in the California Building Standards Code and the provisions of the State Housing Law, as provided. Existing law makes any violation of the State Housing Law a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000, by imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or by both. Existing law requires the California Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development to research and develop, and authorizes those entities to propose for adoption by the commission, mandatory building standards for the installation of electric vehicle charging stations in existing multifamily dwellings, hotels, motels, and nonresidential developments, as provided. This bill would require a new or existing affordable housing development, as defined, for which a permit application is submitted between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028, to comply with either the requirements for installation of low power Level 2 or higher electric vehicle charging receptacles in the 2025 California Green Building Standards Code, as provided, or the applicable requirements for installation of low power Level 2 or higher electric vehicle charging receptacles in the 2024 supplement to the 2022 edition of the California Green Building Standards Code. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. By adding to the duties of local officials, and by expanding the scope of a crime, 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 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.
The Permit Streamlining Act, among other things, requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain timeframes, as specified. The act requires public agencies to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. The act requires a public agency, upon its determination that an application for a development project is incomplete, to include a list and a thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application. This bill would provide that for the purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision adopted or implemented by a public agency, as defined, if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity, except as specified. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing, as specified, pursuant to which the department provides financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development of specified types of housing projects. Existing law sets forth various general powers of the department in implementing these programs, including authorizing the department to enter into long-term contracts or agreements of up to 30 years for the purpose of servicing loans or grants or enforcing regulatory agreements or other security documents. This bill would permit the department to waive payment of residual receipts or minimum annual loan payments used to cover the cost of project monitoring required under a department regulatory agreement, based on the assessment by the department's actual cost in combination with a project's ability to pay.
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.
