Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, authorizes specified adult persons to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law authorizes a specified individual to commence the CARE process, known as the original petitioner. Existing law authorizes the court to dismiss a case without prejudice when the court finds that a petitioner has not made a prima facie showing that they qualify for the CARE process. Existing law requires the court to take prescribed actions if it finds that a prima facie showing has been made, including, but not limited to, setting the matter for an initial appearance on the petition. Existing law requires the court, if it determines the parties have entered or are likely to enter into a CARE agreement, to either approve or modify the CARE agreement and continue the matter at a progress hearing in 60 days, or continue the matter for 14 days to allow the parties additional time to enter into an agreement. Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Existing law requires the court to, for a person found mentally incompetent and not charged with certain offenses, among other things, determine whether restoring the person to mental competence is in the interests of justice. Existing law requires the court to, if restoring the person to mental competence is not in the interests of justice, conduct a hearing, as specified, and determine the person's eligibility for diversion. Under existing law, if the court determines, at the first hearing, that the person is ineligible for diversion, the court is required to hold a hearing to determine the person's other options, including the CARE program. Existing law authorizes a court to refer an individual from, among other things, assisted outpatient treatment or conservatorship proceedings, as specified, to CARE Act proceedings. Existing law provides that if the individual is referred from assisted outpatient treatment, the county behavioral health director or their designee shall be the petitioner, whereas if the referral is from conservatorship proceedings, the conservator or proposed conservator is the petitioner. This bill would allow the court to make a prima facie determination without conducting a hearing. The bill, in the first hearing to determine competence to stand trial, would authorize the court to consider the petitioner's eligibility for both diversion and the CARE program. The bill would authorize the court to refer the petitioner to the CARE Act court if the defendant or counsel for the defendant agrees to the referral and the court has reason to believe the petitioner may be eligible for the CARE program. If the petitioner is not accepted into the CARE program or if the CARE Act court refers the petitioner back to criminal court, as specified, the bill would require the criminal court to conduct a hearing to determine whether the petitioner is eligible for a diversion program. The bill would authorize the county behavioral health agency and jail medical providers to share confidential medical records and other relevant information with the court for the purpose of determining likelihood of eligibility for behavioral health services and programs. The bill would authorize the court to call additional progress hearings after 60 days. The bill would also include persons suffering from bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, except for psychosis related to current intoxication, in the disorder class. The bill would additionally authorize a court to refer an individual from felony proceedings, as specified, to the CARE Act program. The bill would authorize a CARE Act court to consider a referral as a petition for participation in the CARE program if certain requirements are met. The bill would make additional technical and conforming changes. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use to file a CARE process petition with the court, and requires the petition to be signed under penalty of perjury and include either an affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional, as defined, or evidence that the respondent was detained for a minimum of 2 intensive treatments, as specified. The bill would additionally include a nurse practitioner and physician assistant as a licensed behavioral health professional for purposes of individuals authorized to prepare an affidavit supporting a CARE process petition. By increasing various duties on county behavioral health 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, 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 sets forth an expedited procedure for judicial review of decisions by a local public agency regarding the issuance, revocation, suspension, or denial of a permit involving expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, as specified. This bill would provide similar expedited judicial review for denials of permits or other entitlements for housing development projects or residential units at the trial and appellate level, as specified. The bill would authorize a petitioner, the Attorney General, or the Department of Housing and Community Development to file a petition for writ of mandate under these provisions. The bill would require a local agency, upon the request of an applicant or notice from the department or the Attorney General, to compile a record of its proceedings as they occur and to certify the record within 15 days of the service of a writ. The bill would require that a hearing be set no later than 45 days after the filing of the writ and that the court issue a decision no later than 30 days after the matter is submitted or 75 days after the writ was filed, whichever is earlier. The bill would authorize the temporary assignment of judicial officers to ensure the timelines are met.
Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for an eligible agricultural employee housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as specified, and is not subject to a conditional use permit if certain requirements are met, including that the development is located on specified land in the County of Santa Clara or the County of Santa Cruz and is within 15 miles of an area designated as farmland or grazing by the Department of Conservation and is not a site or adjoined to a site where more than 13 of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use, as specified. The act defines an eligible agricultural housing development as an agricultural employee housing development that meets certain requirements, including that the development does not contain more than 36 units or spaces, or 150 units or spaces for developments located in the County of Santa Clara or the County of Santa Cruz, designed for use by a single family or household. This bill would expand eligibility for the approval process under these provisions to include a development located in the Counties of Fresno, Madera, or Merced that meets the above-described requirements that it be located within 15 miles of an area designated as farmland or grazing and not on a site or adjoined to a site where more than 13 of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use, as specified. The bill would also increase the maximum number of units in an eligible agricultural employee housing development from 36 units to 150 units if the development is located in the Counties of Fresno, Madera, or Merced. By expanding the scope of developments eligible for approval, thereby increasing the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Fresno, Madera, and Merced. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, commonly referred to as the Density Bonus Law, requires a city or county to provide a developer that proposes a housing development, as defined, within the city or county with a density bonus, other incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards, as specified, if the developer agrees to construct, among other options, specified units and meets other requirements. This bill would specify that certain provisions of the Density Bonus Law do not require a city, county, or city and county to approve, grant a concession or incentive requiring approval of, or waive or reduce development standards otherwise applicable to, transient lodging as part of a housing development, except as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code proposed by SB 92 to be operative only if this bill and SB 92 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
The Planning and Zoning Law, among other things, provides for the creation of junior accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law requires an ordinance that provides for the creation of a junior accessory dwelling unit to, among other things, require owner-occupancy in the single-family residence in which the junior accessory dwelling unit is permitted. Under this bill, that owner-occupancy requirement would apply only if the junior accessory dwelling unit has shared sanitation facilities with the existing structure. The bill would require an ordinance that provides for the creation of a junior accessory dwelling unit to require that a rental of a junior accessory dwelling unit be for a term longer than 30 days. By imposing new duties on local governments with respect to the approval of junior accessory dwelling units, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes a low-income housing tax credit program pursuant to which the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) provides procedures and requirements for the allocation, in modified conformity with federal law, of state insurance, personal income, and corporation tax credit amounts to qualified low-income housing projects that have been allocated, or qualify for, a federal low-income housing tax credit, and farmworker housing. Existing law limits the total annual amount of the state low-income housing credit for which a federal low-income housing credit is required, as specified. That law authorizes a taxpayer to make an election in its application to the CTCAC to sell all or any portion of any credit allowed. This bill would instead authorize a taxpayer to make that election in the manner prescribed by the CTCAC, as provided.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law, until January 1, 2033, deems a housing development project an allowable use on any real property owned by a local educational agency if the housing development satisfies specified conditions, including, among others, consisting of at least 10 housing units, 100% of the units being rented by local educational agency employees, local public employees, and general members of the public pursuant to a specified priority, and a majority of the units being deed restricted for lower income or moderate-income households, as specified. Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving 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, and describes various requirements applicable to housing development projects. This bill would revise and recast the provisions deeming a housing development project an allowable use on any real property owned by a local educational agency. The bill would require the housing development to satisfy specified conditions, and would apply the requirements of the Housing Accountability Act to review of housing development projects subject to these provisions. The bill would provide that a proposed housing development project is eligible for a density bonus, as specified, and would define various terms for these purposes. The bill would extend the operation of these provisions until January 1, 2036. (2) Existing law, prior to the sale, lease, or rental of any excess real property, requires the governing board of each school district to appoint a school district advisory committee to advise the governing board of the school district in the development of districtwide policies and procedures governing the use or disposition of school buildings or space in school buildings that is not needed for school purposes. Notwithstanding that law, existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to elect not to appoint a school district advisory committee in the sale, lease, or rental of excess real property to be used for teacher or school district employee housing. This bill would specify that the governing board of a school district is authorized to elect not to appoint a school district advisory committee in the sale, lease, or rental of excess real property to be used for teacher or school district employee housing and that is subject to the provisions governing real property owned by a local educational agency described above. (3) 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. Existing law, until January 1, 2033, exempts from CEQA certain actions taken by a public agency related to affordable housing projects, as defined, if certain requirements are met. This bill would provide that an affordable housing project for purposes of the CEQA exemption includes real property owned by a local educational agency, as described above, and would exempt these projects from certain of the requirements for other affordable housing projects. (4) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (5) By adding to the duties of local planning officials with respect to approving certain development projects, 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) The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 governs the procedures for the formation and change of organization of cities and special districts and establishes a local agency formation commission in each county consisting of members appointed as provided. The act expresses the intent of the Legislature that each local agency formation commission, by January 1, 2002, establish written policies and procedures and exercise its powers in a way that encourages and provides planned, well-ordered, efficient urban development patterns, as specified. The act requires these written policies and procedures to include forms to be used for various submittals to the commission, as provided. The act requires each commission to provide access to notices and other information to the public on an internet website, as specified, including notice of all public hearings and commission meetings. This bill would require that each local agency formation commission establish the written policies and procedures described above. The bill would require that the written policies and procedures include any forms necessary for a complete application to the commission concerning a proposed change of organization or reorganization. The bill would require each commission to provide access to its written policies and procedures to the public, including any forms necessary for a complete application for a change of organization or reorganization, through its internet website. (2) The Permit Streamlining Act, among other things, requires a public agency to compile a list of the information required from an applicant for a development project, as provided. This bill would require a public agency, for each type of approval issued in connection with a housing development project, as defined, to publish online the above-described list, including the criteria that the public agency will apply in order to determine the completeness of the development application and the name of the type of approval, as provided. (3) By increasing the duties of local agency formation commissions in establishing and publishing written policies and procedures and of local planning officials in reviewing permit applications for housing development projects, 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.
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.
Existing law, the Floating Home Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions on tenancies in floating home marinas, as defined. Existing law, until January 1, 2030, prohibits management of a floating home marina located in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, or Marin from increasing the gross rental rate for a tenancy for a floating home berth in a floating home marina more than 3% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, or 5%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for a tenancy at any time during the 12 months prior to the effective date of the increase. Existing law prohibits management of a floating home marina from increasing the rent of a new homeowner that purchases a floating home in the marina if the purchase qualifies as an in-place transfer, as defined. This bill would, until January 1, 2038, prohibit management of a floating home marina located in the County of Marin from increasing the above-described rent more than the percent change in the cost of living, as specified, over the course of any 12-month period. The bill would require management to provide notice of any rental rate increases to each homeowner, as specified. The bill would specify that its provisions apply to rent increases for a tenancy in a floating home marina occurring on or after July 1, 2025. The bill would provide that in the event that management increases the rent by more than the amount specified above between July 1, 2025, and January 1, 2026, then the applicable rent on January 1, 2026, is the rent as of July 1, 2025, plus the maximum permissible increase, and that management is not liable to the homeowner for any corresponding rent overpayment. This bill would, until January 1, 2038, in the event that an in-place transfer of a floating home involves the sale of a floating home subject to an existing lease with a 10-year or longer term or that was offered a lease of that term between 2 years and 6 months prior to the time of the sale, except as specified, permit management of a floating home marina located in the County of Marin to establish a new initial rental rate for a prospective homeowner, subject to specified conditions, including that the final sale price of the home provided to the marina owner shall be certified and substantiated in writing to be true under penalty of perjury by the buyer. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would exempt specified floating home berths from the rental rate increase limitations. The bill would void any waiver of the rights provided under these provisions and would provide that its provisions do not affect specified authority of local governments. Existing law prohibits a homeowner from being charged a fee when obtaining a rental agreement on a floating home berth for a term of 12 months or a lesser period, or for charges other than rent, utilities, and incidental charges, as specified. This bill would, until January 1, 2038, for a floating home marina located in the County of Marin, require that fees for utilities and incidental reasonable charges reflect actual costs, and would require a marina owner to demonstrate for all fees charged to a homeowner that the service was, or is currently being, actually rendered. The bill would prohibit marina owners from charging a fee to a homeowner for enforcement of marina rules. This bill would make conforming changes. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Marin. 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.
