(1) Existing law requires a local agency to declare land either "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land," as supported by written findings, before the local agency may take any action to dispose of it consistent with an agency's policies or procedures and defines terms for these purposes. Existing law generally requires a local agency, before disposing or negotiating to dispose of surplus land, to provide a written notice of the availability of the surplus land to specified entities and housing sponsors. Existing law provides that an agency is not required to follow the requirements for the disposal of surplus land for "exempt surplus land." Existing law defines "exempt surplus land" to include certain types of land, including, surplus land totaling 10 or more acres, consisting of either a single parcel, or 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels combined for disposition to one or more buyers pursuant to a plan or ordinance adopted by the legislative body of the local agency, or a state statute and certain surplus land that is a former military base, known as the Alameda Naval Air Station, if specified conditions are met. 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 Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. This bill would revise the definition of "exempt surplus land" to remove the reference to buyers and instead mean 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels combined for disposition to one or more persons or entities, as specified. The bill would also exempt surplus land that is a former military base that was conveyed by the federal government to a local agency or a local reuse authority, and that is all or any portion of the Concord Naval Weapons Station, if certain requirements are met, including that the former military base has an aggregate area greater than 5 acres and that before disposition of the land, the local agency or local reuse authority has entered into a disposition and development agreement that stipulates that at least 25% of the aggregate residential units permitted to be developed will be restricted to lower income households with an affordable housing cost or affordable rent for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing, as specified. The bill would regulate actions challenging the disposition and would prescribe penalties for violations of these provisions. The bill would also regulate the actions of the local agency or local reuse authority, including, among other things, requiring the local agency or local reuse authority to include in the annual report the status of development of residential units on the former military base, as specified. (2) 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. This bill would provide that specified environmental review documents satisfy the requirements of CEQA for any project within the portion of the Concord Naval Weapons Station included within the boundaries of the area plan for the Concord Community Reuse Project, as provided, that has land use types that are consistent with the area plan land use types and locations for those land use types that are consistent with the area plan diagram and the project does not cause the aggregate development in the area plan to exceed the area plan maximum planning areawide total, as specified. The bill would further provide that a project that contains land use types that are consistent with the area plan land use types in locations that are not consistent with the area plan diagram would be subject to review pursuant to CEQA, and would be limited to review of the location of land use types that are not consistent with the area plan diagram, as provided. In any action or proceeding challenging a project described above, the bill would require a project applicant to pay any additional costs incurred by the courts in hearing cases relating to the challenge of the project and would require a lead agency to lodge a copy of the certified record of proceedings with the superior court within 10 calendar days after being served with a complaint or a petition for a writ of mandate. Because the bill imposes new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1, 2027, to adopt rules of court that require any action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the approval of any project within the plan area or any environmental impact review for any project within the plan area, including any potential appeals to the court of appeal or the California Supreme Court, to be resolved to the extent feasible within 270 calendar days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court. The bill would make these provisions severable. (3) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Concord. (4) 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. (5) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Under existing law, a county elections official is required to prepare a certified statement of the results of an election and submit it to the county board of supervisors within 30 days of the election. This bill would make it a felony, punishable by imprisonment for 16 months or 2 or 3 years, to seize or cause or assist in the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified by the elections official. The bill would also make it a felony punishable by imprisonment for 2, 3, or 4 years for any person with authority to direct another person subject to their supervision or authority to seize ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified. By creating new crimes, 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. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires each state or local agency, upon a request for a copy of records that reasonably describes an identifiable record or records, to make the records promptly available to any person upon payment of fees covering direct costs of duplication, or a statutory fee if applicable, except with respect to public records exempt from disclosure by express provisions of law. Existing law requires, upon request, an exact copy to be provided unless it is impracticable to do so. This bill would specify that a recording of a call or a written communication that is maintained by a state or local agency that reports or describes an incident, as defined, occurring at a private detention facility, and specified records relating to that call or communication in the possession of a law enforcement agency, are not confidential, and would require an agency to disclose those records upon request to any member of the public. By requiring agencies to disclose certain records to the public, the bill would increase the duties of local officials and create a state-mandated local program. Existing law specifies that, except as provided, the act does not require the disclosure of records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of intelligence information or security procedures of, the office of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, the Office of Emergency Services and any state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local agency for correctional, law enforcement, or licensing purposes. This bill would also except the above-described requirements relating to records relating to private detention facilities from that provision, but would specify that those requirements do not apply to the office of the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, the Department of Consumer Affairs, or any state entity within the Department of Consumer Affairs, as specified. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. 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.
(1) Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development (the department) and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing, including mobilehome parks, as defined. Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires, before the conversion of a mobilehome park to another use, except as specified, or before closure of a mobilehome park or cessation of use of the land as a mobilehome park, the person or entity proposing the change in use to file a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use of the mobilehome park. Existing law requires the impact report to include a replacement and relocation plan that adequately mitigates the impact upon the ability of the displaced residents of the mobilehome park to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park. Existing law requires the report, if a closure, cessation, or change of use is the result of damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, as defined, to include a technical service inspection report from the department that identifies the observed conditions within the park. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, governs the terms and conditions of residency in mobilehome parks. Existing law requires management, as defined, of a mobilehome park to offer the previous homeowner a right of first refusal to a renewed tenancy in the park if the park is destroyed due to a wildfire or other natural disaster and management elects to rebuild the park in the same location. Existing law, when a mobilehome tenancy is terminated due to damage or the destruction of the mobilehome park or any space as a result of a disaster, as defined, requires management to return to the homeowner any advance rental payments received from the homeowner that cover any period of time after the date of the termination, and discharges the homeowner's obligation to pay rent during any period that a homeowner is unable to occupy their mobilehome or mobilehome space due to a mandatory evacuation order pursuant to a disaster. This bill would require management to make a good faith effort to provide written status updates once per week for the first 4 weeks after a park is damaged by a disaster, resulting in one or more mobilehome units being rendered inaccessible to an existing mobilehome resident, and monthly thereafter until each displaced resident is allowed to return to occupying their mobilehome site or the mobilehome park receives final approval of a change of use, cessation of use, or closure, to the displaced residents of the park, as provided. The bill would prohibit management from restricting a resident of the park from accessing their mobilehome or mobilehome site during regular business hours to collect belongings or inspect damage to their mobilehome on any date later than 7 days after evacuation orders are officially lifted or downgraded by the local governing authority to resident-access only and would require any waiver of liability distributed by management to be limited to immunity for harm resulting from the resident accessing the mobilehome, mobilehome site, or mobilehome park. This bill would require management, before initiating or while pursuing a change of use, cessation of use, or closure related to damage or destruction of the mobilehome park by a disaster, to at least reasonably evaluate the known and estimated costs for rebuilding and reopening the park and identify all potential resources from a list maintained by the department. The bill would require the department to maintain a list of mobilehome-related programs and opportunities that could support rehabilitation or rebuilding of a mobilehome park affected by a disaster declaration and require the department to make the list available on the department's internet website. The bill would require management to submit documentation demonstrating completion of those evaluations and investigations to the department, the local jurisdiction in which the park is situated, and the residents of the mobilehome park, and would prohibit the department and that local jurisdiction from issuing or amending specified approvals and permits to management until that documentation has been submitted. By placing new requirements on local jurisdictions in which mobilehome parks are situated, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize a jurisdiction with enforcement power to require debris removal and specified testing if a mobilehome park is damaged or destroyed in a disaster resulting in one or more mobilehome units being rendered inaccessible to an existing mobilehome resident, as provided. The bill would authorize a resident organization, a displaced resident of the mobilehome park, or a public attorney, as specified, to bring an action against management that willfully violates these provisions, as provided. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, before the approval of any change of use of the mobilehome park, to review the report and any additional relevant documentation and make specified findings regarding the effect on housing opportunities within the local jurisdiction. The bill would additionally provide that before the approval of any change of use the legislative body shall review documentation compliance with the specified evaluations and investigations required by the bill, and that management shall not receive approval of any change of use by the legislative body if management fails to submit that documentation. The Planning and Zoning Law also requires a legislative body, or its delegated advisory agency, before the approval of any change of use of the mobilehome park, to make a finding as to whether or not approval of the park closure and the park's conversion into its intended new use will result in or materially contribute to a shortage of housing opportunities and choices for low- and moderate-income households within the local jurisdiction. This bill would also require that finding to consider the costs of closure or conversion to the residents of the park for which closure or conversion is sought. By placing new requirements on local legislative bodies when approving a change of use for mobilehome parks, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) 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. (4) 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, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. The law defines "mobilehome park" for these purposes to mean an area of land where 2 or more mobilehome sites are rented, or held out for rent, to accommodate mobilehomes used for human habitation. The law caps the amount by which management of a qualified mobilehome park may increase the gross rental rate for a tenancy over the course of any 12-month period. The cap is the lower of 5% of the lowest gross rental rate charge for a tenancy at any time during the preceding 12 months or 3% of that amount plus the percentage change in the cost of living. Under that law, a mobilehome park is subject to that cap if it is located within and governed by the jurisdictions of 2 or more incorporated cities. The law repeals these rent cap provisions on January 1, 2030. This bill would additionally make any mobilehome park that is located in the City of Torrance subject to that cap, as specified, and would extend the repeal of these rent cap provisions to January 1, 2036. For a mobilehome park that is located in the City of Torrance, the bill would cap the rent on January 1, 2027, at the amount of rent as of January 5, 2026, plus the maximum permissible increase described above. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the City of Torrance.
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.
The California Constitution establishes the Judicial Council, and requires the Judicial Council to adopt rules for court administration, practice, and procedure, and to undertake certain responsibilities with regard to court facilities. Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies. Existing law, after a tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied a residential real property for 12 months, prohibits the owner of the residential real property from terminating the tenancy without just cause and requires that just cause to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy. Under existing law, 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, among other reasons. This bill would, by July 1, 2032, require the Judicial Council to assess the timeline by which each county court system has the ability to submit specified data points regarding unlawful detainer cases to the Judicial Council utilizing an automated data collection system. The bill would, beginning January 1, 2033, require each county court system identified by the Judicial Council as able to report to the Judicial Council utilizing the automated data collection system to submit the specified data points to the Judicial Council on a quarterly basis, aggregated by ZIP Code. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2034, all county court systems to report the identified data points to the Judicial Council utilizing the automated data collection system on a quarterly basis, aggregated by ZIP Code of the premises that is the subject of the action. The bill would require, beginning January 1, 2034, and annually thereafter, the Judicial Council to format the information received pursuant to the provisions above in an electronic spreadsheet, as specified, and to publicly post the spreadsheet on its internet website. The bill would make implementation of its provisions contingent upon appropriation by the Legislature, as specified.
Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, requires the owner of a mobilehome park who lists for sale or offers to sell the mobilehome park to any party to provide written notice of the owner's intention to sell the mobilehome park to a resident organization formed by homeowners for purposes of converting the mobilehome park to condominium or stock cooperative ownership interests and for purchasing the mobilehome park, subject to specified conditions. This bill would repeal those provisions and would instead require management of a mobilehome park to give notice to each resident household in the park, resident organization, as defined, and specified public entities, as provided, if certain events demonstrating management's intent to sell occur, subject to specified exceptions. If that event is the receipt of an offer for the sale or transfer the park that management intends to accept or the conditional acceptance of an offer for the sale or transfer of the park, the bill would require the notice to include a statement from management that it has received an offer for sale, lease, or transfer of the park that it intends to accept, a statement of the homeowners' rights under the bill and the deadlines for exercising those rights, and the price, terms, and conditions of the offer management has conditionally accepted or plans to accept. This bill would authorize a resident organization or its assignee, to, no later than 120 days after notice of an offer that management intends to accept or conditional acceptance of an offer is sent, deliver a good faith, written purchase offer for the park to management, along with a statement that the homeowners of more than 50% of the mobilehomes in the park support the purchase offer. This bill would require management to consider the resident organization's proposed purchase offer and negotiate with the resident organization in good faith to determine whether a mutual agreement can be reached that results in the resident organization purchasing the park, and, if the offer is rejected, provide a good faith reason for the rejection. This bill would, if the resident organization's proposed purchase agreement matches the price and substantially the same terms and conditions as the offer management has conditionally accepted or plans to accept, grant the resident organization the right to purchase the park at the price, terms, and conditions stated in its proposed purchase agreement. The bill would provide specified requirements and restrictions on management and the resident organization with regard to the proposed purchase agreement. This bill would authorize a resident organization that represents 50% or more of the homeowners of the mobilehome park to, at its election and subject to rescission at any time, assign its rights under the bill to the municipality in which the resident organization is located, a housing authority located in the municipality, a state agency, or a qualified entity for the purpose of continuing the use of the property as a park. The bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to establish a process for certifying specified entities as qualified entities, as provided, and to maintain and update annually a list of qualified entities to be made available to management for the purpose of distributing notices to qualified entities. This bill would authorize a resident organization or public prosecutor, as specified, to bring an action against management that violates the bill for specified civil penalties and other relief. The bill would provide that its provisions shall be interpreted liberally and are severable.
(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.
The California Financing Law (CFL) generally regulates consumer loan lending practices by finance lenders, brokers, and program administrators. The CFL makes a willful violation of its provisions a crime. This bill would prescribe requirements on loans provided to consumers for the purpose of advancing residential real property rent payments for certain finance lenders and servicers, including prohibiting more than 2 installment payments for the loans, specifying the amount that may be charged for late fees, prescribing disclosure requirements, and prohibiting advertising 0% APR for the loan unless specified conditions are met. By expanding the scope of a crime under the CFL, 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.
