Existing law, the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act, regulates residential care facilities for the elderly. A violation of the act is a crime. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income persons are provided with health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid Program provisions. Existing law provides for the State Supplementary Program for the Aged, Blind and Disabled (SSP) , which requires the State Department of Social Services to contract with the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services to make payments to SSP recipients to supplement Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments made available pursuant to the federal Social Security Act. Under existing regulation, residential facilities for the elderly are prohibited from charging recipients of SSI payments more than a specific set rate for basic services. Existing law requires an individual under these provisions to satisfy certain financial eligibility requirements to be eligible for Medi-Cal, including, among other things, that the individual's countable income does not exceed an income standard equal to a specified amount, plus an income disregard of specified amounts, subject to certain exceptions. This bill would prohibit a residential care facility for the elderly that is contracted to receive Medi-Cal reimbursement for services provided to a resident enrolled in Medi-Cal from charging that resident a room and board rate exceeding the difference between their income, as defined, and the personal and incidental needs allowance set by the department for recipients of SSI/SSP in nonmedical out-of-home care. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, for the purposes of determining Medi-Cal eligibility, exclude the difference between the resident's income and the rate charged by a residential care facility for the elderly and retained by the resident from countable income. The bill would state that the exclusion does not apply to the portion of the difference retained by the resident that exceeds the personal and incidental needs allowance set by the department for recipients of SSI/SSP in nonmedical out-of-home care. Because counties are required to make Medi-Cal eligibility determinations, and this bill would alter Medi-Cal eligibility by changing the income disregard amounts and would increase the responsibility of counties in determining Medi-Cal eligibility, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law provides that in a civil action brought by a plaintiff to challenge a housing development project that meets or exceeds the requirements for low- or moderate-income housing, a defendant may seek an order requiring the plaintiff to furnish an undertaking as security for costs and damages that may be incurred by the defendant if the bringing of the action would result in preventing or delaying the project, as specified. Existing law authorizes the court to limit the amount of the undertaking or to decline to require the plaintiff to furnish an undertaking if the court determines that, based on evidence submitted by the plaintiff, furnishing an undertaking would cause the plaintiff to suffer undue economic hardship. This bill would expand the type of civil actions for which motions for undertaking may be filed to include actions that challenge a community-serving project, as defined.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a local agency, as defined, to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information required from any applicant for a postentitlement phase permit, as defined. Existing law also establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant, and whether to approve or deny an application. If a local agency finds that a complete application is noncompliant, existing law requires the local agency to provide the applicant with a list of items that are noncompliant and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant within specified time limits. Existing law requires the time limits to be tolled, if the local agency requires review of the application by an outside entity, until the outside entity completes the review and returns the application to the local agency, as specified. This bill would prohibit the local agency from requiring or requesting more than 2 plan check and specification reviews in connection with an application for a building permit, as part of its review, except as specified. The bill would authorize a local agency to deny an application that is not compliant with the permit standards following 2 plan check and specification reviews. The bill would also authorize an applicant to request additional submittals of applications that are not compliant with the permit standards. The bill, if a local agency finds that a complete application is noncompliant, would prohibit a local agency from requesting or requiring any action or inaction as a result of a building inspection undertaken to assess compliance with the applicable building permit standards that would represent a deviation from a previously approved building plan or similar approval for the building permit, except as specified. This bill would remove the above-described tolling requirements relating to outside entity reviews and, instead, would require, if federal or state law requires review of the application by another public agency that is independent of the local agency before the local agency is authorized to act on the application, the time limits to be tolled for the application until the public agency completes the review and returns the application to the local agency. The bill would require the local agency to notify the applicant, within 3 business days of the start of the tolling and within 3 business days of the resumption of the time limit, of the tolling and the resumption of the time limit, respectively. (2) Existing law, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, requires a local agency to provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of the agency, as provided by that agency. Existing law requires the city or county to provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. Existing law requires a local agency to provide a final written determination on the appeal not later than 60 business days after receipt of the applicant's written appeal, for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer, and not later than 90 business days for a housing development projects with 26 units or more. Existing law also specifies that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. This bill would revise those timelines to not later than 30 business days for housing development projects with 25 units or fewer and 45 business days for housing development projects with 26 units or more. The bill would remove the specification that the fact that an appeal is permitted to both the planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the specified time period. The bill would remove the requirement that, if a postentitlement phase permit is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, a local agency provide a process for an applicant to appeal that decision to the director of the agency if there is no governing body, as provided by that agency. The bill would remove the requirement that a city or county provide that the right of appeal is to the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both. This bill would authorize the applicant to seek a writ of mandate to compel approval of the application, if the applicant's appeal is denied, or a decision on the appeal is not made within the timelines provided, or an appeals process is not provided as required. By imposing additional duties on local agencies regarding postentitlement phase permits, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households unless the local agency makes written findings as to one of certain sets of conditions, as specified. The act also requires, when a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, that the local agency base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that 2 specified conditions exist. Existing law defines the term "disapprove the housing development project" for these purposes to include any instance in which a local agency takes certain actions or fails to comply with certain requirements, including the time limits described above. Existing law makes a local agency's failure to meet the above-described time limits relating to postentitlement phase permits a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would, instead, make a violation of the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits, among others, a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. The bill would also revise the definition of "disapprove the housing development project" under the Housing Accountability Act to include any instance in which a local agency fails to comply with any of the provisions described above relating to postentitlement phase permits. By requiring local agencies to take certain actions, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The bill would make other conforming changes and would provide that certain changes are declaratory of existing law. (5) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and requires it to administer various programs intended to promote the development of housing, as specified, pursuant to which the department provides financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development of specified types of housing projects. Existing law sets forth various general powers of the department in implementing these programs, including authorizing the department to enter into long-term contracts or agreements of up to 30 years for the purpose of servicing loans or grants or enforcing regulatory agreements or other security documents. This bill would authorize the department to take prescribed action, including authorizing the transfer of excess reserves or excess operating income, as defined, from one rental housing development to another rental housing development with the same owner, as specified, and waiving payment of residual receipts or minimum annual loan payments, as provided.
Existing law makes specified recorded covenants, conditions, restrictions, or private limits on the use of land contained in specified instruments affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in real property unenforceable against the owner of an affordable housing development, as defined, if an approved restrictive covenant affordable housing modification document has been recorded in the public record, as specified. As part of this process, existing law requires the owner to submit to the county recorder a copy of the original restrictive covenant, among other documents, and requires the county counsel to determine, among other things, if a modification document may be recorded. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, authorizes the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency when specified conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property exist, as specified. This bill would expand the provisions making a recorded restrictive covenant unenforceable against the owner of an affordable housing development to additionally apply to a development located on property that is the subject of a recorded restrictive covenant and is located within a county subject to the state of emergency declared by the Governor on January 7, 2025, related to the Palisades Fire and windstorm conditions. The bill would make conforming changes in this regard. By imposing additional duties on county officials, 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.
The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project, as defined for purposes of the act, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That act states that it shall not be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring a housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, except as provided. The act further provides that for its purposes, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. The act requires a housing development project to be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application, as specified, was submitted, except as otherwise provided. The act defines "ordinances, policies, and standards" to include general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and policies of a local agency, as defined, including those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions. This bill would include in the definition of "ordinances, policies, and standards" materials requirements, postentitlement permit standards, and any rules, regulations, determinations, and other requirements adopted or implemented by other public agencies, as defined. The Permit Streamlining Act, among other things, requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain timeframes, as specified. The act requires public agencies to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. The act requires a public agency, upon its determination that an application for a development project is incomplete, to include a list and a thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application. This bill would provide that for the purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision adopted or implemented by a public agency, as defined, if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity, except as specified. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law governs the hiring of real property based on the terms of the agreement or on the behavior of the parties. Existing law requires a landlord to change the locks of a tenant's dwelling if that tenant is a victim of abuse or violence or has an immediate family member or household member who is a victim of abuse or violence, including alleged abuse or violence, as long as the tenant is not alleged to have committed the abuse or violence. Existing law requires a tenant requesting a lock change to provide the landlord with specified documentation. This bill would require a landlord or a landlord's agent, upon request, to make best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations, as defined, to a tenant who is a victim, or whose family or household member is a victim, of specified acts, including domestic violence or sexual assault. The bill would require the landlord or landlord's agent to respond to a request within 5 calendar days of receiving the request, except as specified. The bill would require a landlord or a landlord's agent, if they receive a request for a reasonable accommodation that they cannot grant, to engage in a timely, good faith, and interactive process with the tenant to make best efforts to identify, evaluate, and implement a reasonable accommodation. The bill would authorize a landlord or a landlord's agent to request certification from a tenant requesting a reasonable accommodation demonstrating the tenant's or family or household member's status as a victim, as specified, and would impose confidentiality requirements upon any certification or other documentation provided to a landlord or their agent, except as provided. The bill would require a landlord or a landlord's agent to provide written notice whether a request has been approved or denied, as specified. Existing law prohibits a landlord from taking an adverse action, as defined, based on, among other things, a prospective tenant having previously requested to have their locks changed due to abuse or violence and provides that a landlord who violates this prohibition is liable to the tenant in a civil action for actual damages and statutory damages of not less than $100 and not more than $5,000. This bill would prohibit a landlord or a landlord's agent from retaliating against a tenant for requesting a reasonable accommodation, as specified, and would provide that a landlord or a landlord's agent may be liable to the tenant in a civil action for the same above-described damages, as provided, for a violation of specified provisions described above relating to a tenant's request for reasonable accommodations. The bill would also specify that it does not require a landlord or landlord's agent to undertake an action that constitutes an undue hardship on the landlord or landlord's agent.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, provides for the adoption and administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations by counties and cities and the implementation of those general plans as may be in effect in those counties or cities. In that regard, existing law requires each local agency, by January 1, 2025, to develop a program for the preapproval of accessory dwelling unit plans. This bill would require each local agency, as defined, to develop a program for the preapproval of single-family and multifamily residential housing plans, whereby the local agency accepts single-family and multifamily plan submissions for preapproval and approves or denies the preapproval applications, as specified. The bill would require a large jurisdiction, as defined, to develop this program by July 1, 2026, and a small jurisdiction, as defined, to develop a program by January 1, 2028. The bill would authorize a local agency to charge a fee to an applicant for the preapproval of a single-family or multifamily residential housing plan, as specified. The bill would require the local agency to post preapproved single-family or multifamily residential housing plans and the contact information of the applicant on the local agency's internet website. The bill would require an application for preapproval to include a statement by the applicant that the applicant has sufficient authority, license, or ownership interest in the plan to submit the plan for preapproval and, if approved, posted as described above. This bill would prohibit the preapproval program from applying to single-family or multifamily residential housing plans intended for use in certain communities and developments, as specified. The bill would require a local agency to either approve or deny an application for a single-family or multifamily residential housing unit, both as defined, within 30 days if the lot meets certain conditions and the application utilizes either a single-family or multifamily residential housing unit plan preapproved within the current triennial California Building Standards Code rulemaking cycle or a plan that is identical to a plan used in an application for a single-family or multifamily residential housing unit approved by the local agency within the current triennial California Building Standards Code rulemaking cycle. The bill would also provide that its provisions do not prevent a local agency from voluntarily accepting or admitting additional plans at higher densities in additional zoning districts into the preapproved housing plan program, at the local agency's discretion. Existing 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. Existing law requires the annual report to include, among other things, the city's or county's progress in meeting its share of regional housing needs, as specified. This bill, beginning on April 1, 2027, for large jurisdictions and beginning on April 1, 2029, for small jurisdictions, would require the local agency to include in its annual report the number of units of residential housing that are approved using a preapproved housing plan pursuant to this act. By imposing new duties on local agencies with regard to developing a preapproval program and its annual report, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. Existing law, 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. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. To the extent that the ministerial review process established by the bill would apply to final, discretionary approval of an application for a single-family or multifamily housing unit, the bill would exempt those projects from CEQA. 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.
(1) Existing law establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, administered by the Interagency Council on Homelessness, with respect to rounds 1 to 5, inclusive, of the program, and the Department of Housing and Community Development, with respect to round 6 of the program, for the purpose of providing jurisdictions, as defined, with one-time grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as specified. This bill would establish round 7 of the program. The bill would authorize the Department of Finance to augment Item 2240-001-0001 of the Budget Act of 2025 by $8,000,000 from the General Fund to prepare to administer round 7 of the program, as specified. The bill would require the Department of Finance to provide notification of any augmentation within 10 days to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. The bill would, effective July 1, 2026, appropriate $500,000,000, as specified, provided that these funds be disbursed in accordance with specified requirements, including that funds from this appropriation be disbursed to a city, county, tribe, or continuum of care for round 7 of the program after a declaration by the director of the department, in consultation with the Director of Finance, that the department has substantially completed its initial disbursement of round 6 funds to the city, county, tribe, or continuum of care, and that the city, county, tribe, or continuum of care has obligated at least 50% of its total round 6 award. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact future legislation that specifies the parameters for round 7 of the program, 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 (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. CEQA requires the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to prepare and develop proposed guidelines for the implementation of CEQA by public agencies and requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt those proposed guidelines. CEQA requires those adopted guidelines to include a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and exempts those classes of projects from CEQA, commonly known as categorical exemptions. CEQA requires the guidelines to include criteria for public agencies to follow in determining whether or not a proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and requires the criteria to require a finding that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if one or more of specified conditions exist. This bill would exempt from CEQA, except as provided, a rezoning that implements the schedule of actions contained in an approved housing element, as specified. The bill would require the lead agency to be responsible for determining whether a project is exempt from CEQA. By requiring a lead agency to determine the applicability of the exemption and by increasing the duties of a lead agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, for the approval of a proposed project that would otherwise be exempt from CEQA pursuant to a statutory exemption, or specified categorical exemptions adopted before January 1, 2026, but for a single condition, as specified, limit the application of CEQA to the effects upon the environment that are caused solely by that single condition. For these projects, the bill would only require the initial study or EIR to examine those effects that the lead agency determines, based upon substantial evidence in the record, are caused solely by the single condition that makes the proposed project ineligible for a statutory or categorical exemption. The bill would provide that these provisions do not apply to, among other things, a project that includes a distribution center, as defined, oil and gas infrastructure, as defined, or a project located on specified natural and protected lands, as defined. This bill would exempt from CEQA specified new agricultural employee housing projects and projects consisting exclusively of the repair or maintenance of an existing farmworker housing project. Existing law exempts from CEQA, until January 1, 2028, specified projects that, among other things, do not affect wetlands or sensitive habitats, undertaken by a public agency or private entity that primarily benefit a small disadvantaged community water system or a state small water system, as provided. Existing law defines various terms for these purposes. This bill would extend the applicability of that exemption until January 1, 2032, and would expand the definition of a project for purposes of the exemption to include a project to provide sewer service to a disadvantaged community served by one or more inadequate sewage treatment systems, as defined. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, exempt from CEQA specified projects for a community water system that receives funding from specified sources that does not otherwise include any construction activities if the project results in long-term net benefits to climate resiliency, biodiversity, and sensitive species recovery and includes procedures and ongoing management for the protection of the environment. This bill would exempt from CEQA wildfire risk reduction projects, including, among other things, projects for prescribed fire, defensible space clearance, and fuel breaks. Existing law exempts from CEQA specified projects that consist of linear broadband deployment in a right-of-way if the project meets specified conditions. This bill would expand that exemption to include a right-of-way of a local street or road. This bill would exempt from CEQA updates to the state's climate adaptation strategy, as provided. This bill would exempt from CEQA any activity or approval necessary for or incidental to planning, design, site acquisition, construction, operation, or maintenance of public park or nonmotorized recreational trail facilities funded by a specified source. This bill would exempt from CEQA, except when located on natural and protected lands, as defined, a project that consists exclusively of a day care center, as specified, a project that consists exclusively of a federally qualified health center or a rural health clinic, as specified, a project that consists exclusively of a nonprofit food bank or food pantry, as specified, and a project that consists exclusively of a facility for advanced manufacturing, as specified. This bill would exempt from CEQA a project that consists of the development, construction, or operation of a heavy maintenance facility or other maintenance facility for electrically powered high-speed rail, as defined, if specified conditions are met. The bill would exempt from CEQA a project that consists of the development, construction, or modification of a proposed passenger rail station, or design changes to a passenger rail station, for the purpose of serving electrically powered high-speed rail, if specified conditions are met. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of some of the above-described exemptions, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, sets forth the requirements for the adoption, publication, review, and implementation of regulations by state agencies. This bill would require the office, on or before July 1, 2027, to map the eligible urban infill sites within every urbanized area or urban cluster in the state, as provided. The bill would require the office to develop a definition of and metrics for identifying an eligible urban infill site, as provided. The bill would require the office, at least 120 days before initial adoption of a map of eligible urban infill sites, to transmit a copy of the draft map or revision to the board of supervisors of each county and to the city council of each city in which any portion of the mapped area is located. The bill would authorize a city, county, or city and county to submit comments and proposed corrections and would require the office to consider those comments or proposed corrections and revise the draft map as appropriate. The bill would require the office to publish the draft map on its internet website for at least 45 days, conduct at least one public meeting to present the draft map, and receive public comments, as provided. The bill would authorize the office to amend any portion of the map, as provided. This bill would exempt the adoption or amendment of a map of eligible urban infill sites and the development of the definition of and metrics for identifying an eligible urban infill site from the Administrative Procedure Act. Existing law limits the application of CEQA to the approval of an infill project, as defined, to the effects on the environment that are specific to the project or to the project site and were not addressed as significant effects in the prior EIR or where substantial new information shows the effects will be more significant than described in the prior EIR, as provided. Existing law requires the office to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Natural Resources Agency for certification and adoption guidelines to implement this provision. This bill would, on or before January 1, 2026, and at least once every 2 years thereafter, require the guidelines to be updated to address any rigid requirements, lack of clarity in vague terminology, and the potential for excessive exposure to frivolous litigation over lead agency determinations, as specified. (4) CEQA requires an action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul certain acts or decisions of a public agency to be commenced according to specified processes, including that at the time that the action or proceeding is filed, the plaintiff or petitioner is required to file a request that the respondent public agency prepare the record of proceedings relating to the subject of the action or proceeding, and requires the record of proceedings to include specified items and materials, including, among other things, all internal agency communications, including staff notes and memoranda related to the project or to compliance with CEQA, but excluding communications that are of a logistical nature, as specified. This bill would, except for a project that includes a distribution center or oil and gas infrastructure, exclude staff notes and internal agency communications from the record of proceedings, as provided. (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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
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. Under existing law, the Transit-Oriented Development Implementation Program is administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide local assistance to developers for the purpose of developing higher density uses within close proximity to transit stations as provided. Existing law, establishes the Transit-Oriented Development Implementation Fund and, to the extent funds are available, requires the department to make loans for the development and construction of housing development projects within close proximity to a transit station that meet specified criteria. This bill would authorize a project, to the extent that the project is required to mitigate transportation impacts under CEQA, to satisfy the mitigation requirement by electing to contribute an amount of money, at a price per vehicle mile traveled, as determined by the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, to the Transit-Oriented Development Implementation Fund for the purposes of the Transit-Oriented Development Implementation Program, as provided. The bill would require the office, on or before July 1, 2029, and at least once every 3 years thereafter, to update the price per vehicle mile traveled based on specified factors. The bill would require, upon appropriation by the Legislature, the contributions to be available to the department to fund developments located in the same region, as defined, with preference given to specified projects. The bill would require the department to, for each award, confirm the estimated reduction in vehicle miles traveled, as provided, and would require the department to post specified information on its internet website.
