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, and specified land outside its boundaries, that contains specified mandatory elements, including an environmental justice element, or related goals, policies, and objectives integrated in other elements, that identifies disadvantaged communities, as defined, within the area covered by the general plan of the city, county, or city and county, if the city, county, or city and county has a disadvantaged community, as specified. The law requires a city, county, or city and county subject to these provisions to adopt or review the environmental justice element, or the environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives in other elements, upon the adoption of the next revision of two or more elements concurrently on or after January 1, 2018. This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to meaningfully involve disadvantaged communities in the development, adoption, and implementation of the environmental justice element, or the related goals, policies, and objectives integrated in other elements, using methods that are designed to effectively involve disadvantaged communities based on local conditions and circumstances, as specified. The bill would require a city, county, or city and county subject to these provisions to adopt or review the environmental justice element, or the environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives in other elements, upon the earliest of the adoption or next revision of two or more elements concurrently on or after January 1, 2018, or June 30, 2031, except as specified. By increasing the duties on local governments, this 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 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.
Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and downpayment assistance for first-time home buyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. Existing law, the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, authorized, the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as well as financing for a specified program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. This bill would enact the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $11,250,000,000, pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Of the proceeds from the sale of these bonds, $10,000,000,000 would be used to finance programs to fund affordable rental housing and home ownership programs, including, among others, the Multifamily Housing Program, the CalHome Program, and the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program, and $1,250,000,000 would be used to provide additional funding for the above-described program for farm, home, and mobilehome purchase assistance for veterans, as provided. This bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 3, 2026, statewide general election, in accordance with specified law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, with respect to land where housing is an allowable use and except as specified, prohibits a county or city, including the electorate exercising its local initiative or referendum power, in which specified conditions exist, determined as provided by the Department of Housing and Community Development, from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition, as defined, that would have certain effects. Under existing law, these proscribed policies, standards, or conditions include, among others, (A) changing the land use designation or zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing zoning district below what was allowed under the general plan or specific plan land use designation and zoning ordinances of the county or city as in effect on January 1, 2018, and (B) imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing development within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the county or city, except as provided. Existing law states that these prohibitions apply to any zoning ordinance adopted or amended on or after the effective date of these provisions, and that any development policy, standard, or condition on or after that date that does not comply is deemed void. Existing law prohibits a county or city subject to these provisions from enforcing a zoning ordinance imposing a moratorium or other similar restriction on or limitation of housing development until it has submitted the ordinance to, and received approval from, the Department of Housing and Community Development. Existing law requires the department to approve a zoning ordinance submitted to it only if the department determines that the zoning ordinance satisfies these requirements. If the department denies approval of the zoning ordinance, as specified, existing law states that the ordinance is deemed void. This bill would expand the prohibition against enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that has the effect of imposing or enforcing a moratorium on housing development within all or a portion of the jurisdiction of the county or city to also prohibit these policies, standards, or conditions within the sphere of influence of a city, as defined. The bill would define "moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development" for purposes of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to include, but not be limited to, the electorate of a county or city subject to these provisions from exercising its referendum power in a manner that has the effect of extending an existing moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development. The bill would prohibit a county or city subject to these provisions from enforcing an initiative or referendum imposing a moratorium or other similar restriction on or limitation of housing development until the initiative or referendum receives approval from the department pursuant to the approval process described above. The bill would state that if the department denies approval of the initiative or referendum, as specified, the initiative or referendum would be deemed void. The bill would provide that these provisions do not preclude, limit the enforceability of, or require department approval of a referendum or an initiative that requires voter approval of a proposed general plan amendment that would increase the intensity of land use allowed on lands designated for open space, agricultural, or rural land uses in the operative general plan, as specified. Existing law defines "reducing the intensity of land use" for purposes of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 to include reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations, or any other action that would individually or cumulatively reduce the site's residential development capacity. This bill would revise the definition of "reducing the intensity of land use" to mean any action that would individually or cumulatively reduce the site's residential development capacity, including reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations. This bill would also provide that an action or special proceeding brought to enforce these provisions is subject to a 3-year statute of limitations under specified law. The bill would provide that the bill's provisions apply retroactively to any pending action or proceeding. (2) 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. (3) By imposing new requirements and duties on local planning officials with respect to housing development, this 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, 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. Existing law defines, for its purposes, a housing development project as a use consisting of, among other things, mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses meeting one of several conditions, including that at least 23 of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use. This bill would revise the definition of "housing development project" to, in the case of mixed-use developments with at least 23 of the new or converted square footage designated for residential use, require that no portion of the project be designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except as specified. This bill would correct cross-references in the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1308 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1308 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to amend its general plan relative to the data and analysis contained in the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, as specified and to amend its zoning ordinance consistent with the general plan. Existing law prohibits the legislative body of a city or county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from entering into a development agreement for property that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress on construction of a flood protection system that will result in flood protection equal to or greater than the urban level of flood protection in urban or urbanizing areas intended to be protected by the system, which, except as provided, shall be achieved by 2025 for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees. Existing law similarly prohibits each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement that would result in the construction of a new building or construction that would result in an increase in allowed occupancy for an existing building, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. Existing law similarly requires the legislative body of each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to deny approval of a tentative map or a parcel map for a subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. This bill would include in the exceptions to the requirement that the urban level of flood protection be achieved for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees by 2025, specified areas located in the City of Marysville, the City of Sacramento, the County of Sacramento, the County of Sutter, and the County of Yuba that shall, instead, be required to achieve the urban level of flood protection by 2030. The bill would authorize the Department of Water Resources to require a city or county listed above to contribute its fair and reasonable share of any property damage caused by a flood in its respective jurisdiction, as specified, until the city or county finds the area has met the urban level of flood protection. The bill would make a related technical change. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Sacramento, County of Sutter, County of Yuba, City of Marysville, and City of Sacramento.
(1) Existing law, the Governor's Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 2025 (GRP) , which became effective on July 5, 2025, reorganized specified state agencies and departments, including establishing the Housing Development and Finance Executive Committee (executive committee) within the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency for the purpose of centralizing affordable housing finance policymaking across state government. The GRP requires the executive committee to, among other things, work to align state housing funding sources for the creation of a consolidated application for multifamily affordable housing developers and a coordinated review process for the application of funds. The GRP, beginning July 1, 2026, establishes the Housing Development and Finance Committee within the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, which the GRP also establishes, and transfers the executive committee to the Housing Development Finance Committee effective July 1, 2026. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that, in addition to the other duties required of the executive committee created by the GRP to align state housing funding sources, as described above, the executive committee be required to make recommendations to the Legislature regarding improvements the Department of Housing and Community Development may make to optimize loan administration, as specified. (2) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, formerly known as the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development. This bill would require an annual report required by its provisions to be prepared using standards, forms, and definitions adopted by the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, except as specified. The bill would also make a nonsubstantive change to update a reference to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation in these provisions. (3) The Permit Streamlining Act establishes requirements for the review and approval of applications for development projects by public agencies. Existing law defines "development project" for purposes of those provisions to include a housing development project that requires an entitlement from a local agency. This bill would define "housing development project" for purposes of those provisions. (4) 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, for various purposes, including for the purpose of limiting certain exemptions from CEQA, defines "natural and protected lands" to mean sites located within specified locations, including, among other locations, lands protected as preserve areas or reserve lands, as provided. This bill would instead include in the definition of "natural and protected lands" for CEQA purposes lands that are identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan, as provided, or other adopted natural resource protection plan. (5) Existing law exempts from CEQA specified new agricultural employee housing projects and projects consisting exclusively of the repair or maintenance of an existing farmworker housing project. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change by amending and renumbering the above-described section of law. (6) CEQA exempts from its requirements housing projects that meet certain conditions. Under the exemption for housing projects, CEQA requires a local government to notify and consult, as specified, with each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site on the proposed project, as specified. For a development project exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption, existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, requires that a public agency that is the lead agency for the development project approve or disapprove the project within 30 days from the conclusion of the consultation process. Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) , among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving a housing development project that complies with applicable objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, or from imposing a condition that it be developed at a lower density, unless the local agency bases its decision on written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that specified conditions exist, as provided. When a local agency makes a decision as described above, existing law requires the local agency to provide the applicant documentation describing the reason for the decision within a specified time period. For a development project exempt from CEQA pursuant to the exemption for housing projects, this bill would instead require the public agency to approve or disapprove the project within 30 days from the later of the conclusion of the above-specified consultation process or the above-specified time period under the HAA. (7) Existing law, for a proposed housing development project that would otherwise be exempt from CEQA pursuant to a statutory exemption or specified categorical exemptions, but for a single condition, limits the application of CEQA to the effects upon the environment that are caused by that single condition, except as provided. This bill would exempt from that limited application of CEQA a housing development project that has a project site or parcel size that exceeds 4 acres, if the project is a builder's remedy project, as defined, and the project applicant applied, as specified. (8) Existing law exempts from CEQA any aspect of a housing development project, as defined, including any permits, approvals, or public improvements required for the housing development project, if the housing development project meets specified conditions, as provided. Existing law requires, as one of those conditions, that the project site or parcel size for a builder's remedy project, as defined, not be more than 5 acres. This bill would instead require, as part of those conditions, that the project site or parcel size for a builder's remedy project not be more than 4 acres. The bill would require, if a lead agency determines that CEQA does not apply to an activity pursuant to the above-described exemption and determines to approve or carry out the activity, the lead agency to file a notice of exemption with the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and the county clerk of the county in which the activity will occur, as specified. (9) This bill, notwithstanding exemptions from CEQA or the limited application of CEQA to housing development projects, would apply CEQA to a housing development project that meets specified criteria, including, among other things, that the project is located in a city with a population of more than 85,000 but less than 95,000, as determined by the 2020 Census, and a portion of the parcel where the project is located is within a regulatory floodway, as provided. (10) Existing law establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as specified. Existing law provides for the allocation of funding under the program among continuums of care, cities, counties, and tribes in 6 rounds, with rounds 1 to 5, inclusive, administered by the Interagency Council on Homelessness and round 6 administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as provided. Existing law establishes a round 7 of the program and states the intent of the Legislature to enact future legislation that specifies the parameters, as specified. Existing law, effective July 1, 2026, appropriates $500,000,000, as specified, provided that these funds be disbursed in accordance with specified requirements. Existing law authorizes the Department of Finance to augment Item 2240-001-001 of the Budget Act of 2025 by $8,000,000 to prepare to administer round 7 of the program. This bill would instead require the department, during fiscal year 2025–26, to prepare to administer round 7 of the program with the goal that initial round 7 disbursements will be available to grantees meeting the statutory provisions for disbursement beginning September 1, 2026, as specified. (11) This bill would appropriate the sum of $2,106,000 from the General Fund to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to support implementation of SB 131 (Chapter 24 of the Statutes of 2025) . (12) By increasing the duties of local agencies, this 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. (13) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Under the Planning and Zoning Law, the legislative body of a county or city may adopt ordinances that, among other things, regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land, as provided. 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. Existing law requires a local agency to consider ministerially a specified proposed housing development or to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split if the development or parcel meets specified requirements, including, that the development or parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance, as specified. Existing law authorizes a local agency to impose specified objective standards on the development or parcel created by an urban lot split, except as specified. With respect to ministerial review of a proposed housing development under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to consider ministerially the development that is not located in either a contributing structure within a historic district included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a historic property or district pursuant to city or county ordinance or in a parcel individually listed as a historical resource included in the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a property individually designated or listed as a city or county landmark under a city or county ordinance. The bill would also authorize a local agency to adopt objective standards for the purposes of maintaining the historical value of a historic district listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, as specified. With respect to an urban lot split under the above-described provisions, this bill would, if the other specified requirements are met, instead require a local agency to ministerially approve the urban lot split if the parcel is not located within a historic landmark property included on the State Historical Resources Inventory or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark pursuant to a city or county ordinance. The bill would additionally require that the proposed urban lot split not require demolition or alteration of specified structures. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this 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) Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires a person or entity proposing a change in use of a mobilehome park to file a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use of the mobilehome park that includes a replacement and relocation plan, as specified. Existing law requires the legislative body or advisory agency to review the report before any change of use, as provided. Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing. This bill would require, if a closure, cessation, or change of use is the result of damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, as defined, the person or entity proposing that closure, cessation, or change of use to file an impact report, as described in the paragraph above, which also includes a technical service inspection report from the Department of Housing and Community Development that identifies the observed conditions within the park. By placing new requirements on local legislative bodies when approving permits for a change of use for mobilehome parks, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the person or entity proposing the change of use of a mobilehome park to pay to the displaced resident the in-place market value of the displaced resident's mobilehome, as provided. This bill would provide that if the proposed closure, cessation, or change of use is related to damage or destruction by a disaster, the person or entity proposing the change of use of a mobilehome park is not required to pay to the displaced resident the in-place market value of the displaced resident's mobilehome. (2) Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies. Existing law requires the lessor of a building intended for human occupation to repair dilapidations, as specified, rendering it untenantable. Existing law requires a dwelling to be deemed untenantable if it substantially lacks certain affirmative standard characteristics. This bill would impose a duty upon the landlord to undertake certain actions, within a reasonable time and according to specified cleaning protocols, as may be necessary to remediate any dilapidations that arise as a result of a disaster. The bill would establish a presumption that the presence at the rental unit of debris from the disaster renders the unit untenantable, until a determination has been made by a local public health agency or official that the debris does not contain toxic substances. This bill would require the landlord to notify the tenant in writing that the landlord has fulfilled its duty to remediate dilapidations and that the tenant may view various reports, if requested. The bill would specify that these provisions do not require a landlord to rebuild a residential real property or any portion thereof that has sustained damage as a result of a disaster, and that, unless lawfully terminated by either party, the tenancy remains in effect and the tenant has the right to return to the rental unit, at the same rental rate in effect immediately prior to the disaster, as soon as it is safe and practicable. (3) Existing law terminates the hiring of a thing by the destruction of the thing hired, or when the greater part of the thing hired perishes from any other cause than the want of ordinary care of the hirer. This bill would require the landlord to return to the tenant any advance rental payments made by the tenant when the hiring of residential real property is terminated due to damage or destruction of the property. The bill would also require management of a mobilehome park to return to the homeowner any advance rental payments made by the homeowner when the mobilehome tenancy is terminated due to damage or the destruction of the mobilehome park or any space as a result of a disaster. The bill would discharge the tenant's or homeowner's obligation to pay rent during any period during which a tenant or homeowner is unable to occupy their rental unit due to a mandatory evacuation order pursuant to a disaster, as provided. (4) Existing law makes the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation the head of the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which executes the laws of this state relating to, among other things, residential mortgage lenders and servicers and mortgage loan originators employed or supervised by finance lenders or residential mortgage lenders. This bill would require the commissioner to, upon the declaration of a state of emergency due to wildfire, as specified, coordinate with mortgage lenders and servicers subject to the commissioner's jurisdiction operating in this state to facilitate and monitor the implementation and promotion of mortgage forbearance, foreclosure prevention, and loss mitigation programs available to borrowers who experience a material decrease in household income or a material increase in household expenses due, directly or indirectly, to the wildfire emergency. (5) 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 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 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. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, prohibits an owner of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as specified. This bill would, until January 20, 2029, enact the Social Security Tenant Protection Act of 2025 (the Act) . The Act would authorize a tenant of residential real property to assert Social Security hardship as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer proceeding based on the nonpayment of rent. The Act would define "Social Security hardship" as a loss of income due to an interruption in the payment of Social Security benefits due to the action or inaction of the federal government. The Act would require a tenant asserting Social Security hardship as an affirmative defense to provide, to the satisfaction of the court, evidence that Social Security payments typically received by the tenant's household have been terminated, delayed, or reduced due to no fault of the tenant and that the hardship prevented the tenant from paying the rent. If the tenant successfully provides this evidence, the Act would require the court to issue a stay of the unlawful detainer action, as specified. The Act would not relieve a tenant of their obligation to pay past due rent, and it would require a tenant, within 14 days of the Social Security benefits being restored, to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. If the tenant pays all past due rent or enters into a payment plan with the owner, the Act would require the court to either dismiss the unlawful detainer action with prejudice or set aside the judgment against all named and unnamed defendants in the action. The Act would further require the Judicial Council, by January 1, 2027, to adopt or modify forms as needed to implement the Act.
