(1) 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, which includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. For the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with each council of governments, to determine each region's existing and projected need for housing, and requires the appropriate council of governments, or the department for cities and counties without a council of governments, to adopt a final regional housing plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county, as provided. Existing law authorizes at least 2 or more cities and a county, or counties, at least 28 months prior to the scheduled housing element revision, to form a subregional entity to allocate the subregion's existing and projected housing need among its members. If the council of governments does not receive a notification of this formation at least 28 months prior to the update, existing law requires the council of governments to implement specified requirements regarding the regional housing need process. Existing law requires the council of governments to determine the share of regional housing need assigned to each delegate subregion at least 25 months prior to the scheduled revision. This bill, except with respect to the 7th housing element cycle for councils of governments with a housing element revision due date during the calendar year 2027, 2028, or 2029, would extend the above-described timeline for cities and counties to form a subregional entity to allocate the subregion's housing need, as provided, from 28 months to 34 months, and the above-described timeline for the council of governments to determine the share of regional housing need assigned to each subregion from 25 months to 31 months, respectively. (2) Existing law, at least 2 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, as specified, requires each council of governments, or delegate subregion as applicable, to develop, in consultation with the department, a proposed methodology for distributing the existing and projected regional housing need to jurisdictions, as specified. Existing law, at least 112 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, as specified, requires each council of governments and delegate subregion, as applicable, to distribute a draft allocation of regional housing needs to each local government in the region or subregion, where applicable, and the department, as specified. This bill, except with respect to the 7th housing element cycle for councils of governments with a housing element revision due date during the calendar year 2027, 2028, or 2029, would instead require that the above-described methodology be developed at least 212 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, and that the distribution of the draft allocation plan be made at least 2 years before a scheduled revision of the housing element, respectively. (3) Existing law requires each city, county, and city and county to, among other things, revise its housing element according to a specified schedule. Existing law generally requires local governments within the jurisdiction of certain metropolitan planning organizations or regional transportation planning agencies to update their housing elements 18 months after adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, but not later than 8 years later than the deadline for adoption of the previous 8-year housing element, as specified. For subsequent revisions of the housing element after the 5th revision, existing law requires certain local governments to revise their housing elements at 5-year intervals, as specified. For the 7th revision and subsequent revisions of the housing element, existing law makes subsequent revisions due 24 months after the adoption of the 2nd regional transportation plan update for local governments within the jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments, except as provided. This bill would instead generally require local governments within the above-described metropolitan planning organizations or regional transportation planning agencies to update their housing elements 18 months after the estimated adoption date of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, as specified. The bill would require the 8th revision of the housing elements for the certain local governments previously at 5-year intervals for the 7th revision, to be due by June 30, 2032. The bill would also require, for the 9th and subsequent revisions of the housing elements for those local governments, to be due 18 months after adoption of every 2nd regional transportation plan update, as provided. For the 8th and subsequent revisions, the bill would require a local government within the Southern California Association of Governments to adopt the revised housing no later than 8 years later than the deadline for adoption of the previous 8-year housing element. The housing element law requires a metropolitan planning organization or regional transportation planning agency that has an 8-year revision interval described above to notify the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Department of Transportation in writing of the estimated adoption date for its next regional transportation plan update at least 12 months before the estimated adoption date. This bill would instead require the above-described notification 24 months before the estimated adoption date. (4) 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. (5) By requiring local officials to provide a higher level of service, 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 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 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 establishes the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation under the direction of the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation. Existing law makes the department responsible for administering various laws relating to financial institutions, including the Banking Law, the California Credit Union Law (CCUL) , and the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act (CRMLA) , a willful violation of which is punishable as a misdemeanor. The CRMLA requires, as often as the commissioner deems necessary and appropriate, but at least once every 48 months, the commissioner to examine the affairs of each residential mortgage lender and servicer licensee for compliance with the CRMLA. The CRMLA authorizes the commissioner to examine the licensee's officers, directors, employees, or agents under oath regarding the licensee's operations. The CRMLA requires the commissioner to provide a written statement, the disclosure of which is subject to certain restrictions, of the findings of the examination, issue a copy of that statement to each licensee's principals, officers, or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure correction of any violations of the CRMLA. This bill, the California Fair Lending Examination Act, would require, under the Banking Law and the CCUL, the commissioner to, at least once every 4 years, examine, as prescribed, the books and records of certain entities subject to the commissioner's examination authority under those laws for compliance with any nondiscrimination law applicable to mortgage lending, as specified, and would require the commissioner to provide a written statement of the findings of that examination, issue a copy of that statement to the subject's principals, officers, or directors, and take appropriate steps to ensure correction of any violations of applicable nondiscrimination laws. The bill would prohibit disclosure of that statement to anyone other than the subject entity, law enforcement officials, or other state or federal regulatory agencies for further investigation and enforcement. This bill would, as part of the above-described examination required by the CRMLA, require the commissioner to additionally examine the licensee for compliance with any nondiscrimination law applicable to mortgage lending, as prescribed. This bill would make a violation of an applicable nondiscrimination law a violation of the Banking Law, the CCUL, or the CRMLA, as applicable, and would authorize, under the Banking Law and the CCUL, the commissioner to examine the applicable entity's officers, directors, employees, or agents under oath regarding the entity's operations. By expanding the scope of the crimes of perjury and of violating the CRMLA, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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 Housing Authorities Law establishes a housing authority within each county and city and authorizes the authority to, among other things, prepare, carry out, acquire, lease, and operate housing projects and housing developments for persons of low income, as provided. This bill would, unless required by federal law, and except as specified, prohibit a housing authority or other covered housing provider, as defined, from establishing or implementing any rules, policies, or procedures that impose term limits or work requirements, as defined, as a condition of eligibility for any covered housing or that impact the amount of the rent subsidy or assistance provided to covered housing tenants. The bill would, however, permit a covered housing provider to establish or implement a voluntary employment or job training program if specified conditions apply. The bill would provide that its provisions do not limit or alter the operation of specified federal housing programs and requirements.
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.
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 (EIR) 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. The Permit Streamlining Act sets forth various procedures for the review and approval of development project applications. Among other things, the act requires a public agency that is the lead agency or a responsible agency for a development project to approve or disapprove the project within a specified period of time, which varies depending on the project's phase in the CEQA process. The act defines "development project" to include specified housing development projects, as provided. This bill would additionally require approval or disapproval of a housing development project within 30 days from the date of certification by the lead agency of the EIR, if the EIR is prepared pursuant to specified provisions of CEQA if certain other conditions are met. The bill would also define "housing development project" for the purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act and make additional conforming changes. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, 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, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development, as defined, within the city or county with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct, among other options, 20% of the total units, as defined, for lower income students in a student housing development that meets certain requirements. These requirements include, among other things, that all units in the student housing development be used exclusively for undergraduate, graduate, or professional students enrolled full time at an institution of higher learning, and the rent provided in the applicable units of the development for lower income students is calculated at 30% of 65% of the area median income for a single-room occupancy unit type. This bill, for the purposes of a student housing development being eligible for a density bonus and other incentives or concessions, would revise and recast the rent requirements for the applicable units of the development for lower income students. The bill would also require a city or county to provide an additional density bonus, as specified, for a student housing development that meets the requirements for being eligible for the above-described density bonus and meets other specified criteria, including that the development provides 24% of the total units to lower income students, and the applicant agrees to include additional rental units affordable to moderate-income students, as defined, provided that the resulting student housing development would not restrict more than 50% of the total units, as defined, to moderate-income or lower income students. By imposing new duties on local governments, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by AB 2433, SB 1383, or both, to be operative only if this bill and AB 2433, SB 1383, or both are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) in order to meet the public transit problems of the County of Santa Clara. Existing law authorizes the VTA to purchase or otherwise acquire property for transit-oriented joint development projects, as provided. This bill would authorize the VTA to similarly purchase or acquire property for an employee housing project, as defined, for VTA employees and members of the public, as specified. The bill would authorize the VTA to construct affordable rental housing for employees and affordable for-sale housing that promotes housing opportunities for VTA employees, as specified. The bill would require the VTA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the use of the bill's provisions to develop housing, as specified. By requiring the VTA to submit a new report, 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, 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 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.
