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 the Department of Housing and Community Development that includes, among other specified information, the agency's progress in meeting its share of regional housing needs and the number of units approved and disapproved in the prior year. This bill, beginning with the first annual report submitted after the due date for the 7th cycle revision of the housing element, would require that annual report to additionally include specified information regarding the special housing needs of families and persons in need of emergency shelter. The bill would require the report to include, among other information, a list of any federal, state, or local funding that has been allocated from specified programs and a description of any actions taken to conduct outreach to individuals who are unhoused to inform them about those resources. 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 provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant to be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. This bill, the Tenant Protections for Immigrant Families Act of 2026 (Act) , would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property, as defined, from initiating or continuing an unlawful detainer action to evict a tenant whose income, ability to obtain income, or financial support is impacted by immigration enforcement activities until no sooner than 90 days after the tenant or household member's detention-related hardship ends, as specified. The bill would require a court to stay the proceeding of a pending unlawful detainer action against a covered tenant if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the tenant provides the court with specified documentation, such as a signed declaration of detention-related hardship that includes a specified statement, that the tenant or household member suffered a detention-related hardship that prevented them from paying the unpaid rent alleged in the unlawful detainer action. Any person who knowingly provides false information in the declaration of detention-related hardship would be subject to a civil fine of up to $1,500. Under the bill, if a tenant has raised detention-related hardship as an affirmative defense, an owner of residential real property may request an evidentiary hearing regarding the tenant's detention-related hardship stay of the unlawful detainer action, at which the tenant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence their detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit the owner from charging or collecting any late fees, interest, or other penalties related to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant subject to these provisions. Within 90 days after the end of the detention-related hardship, the bill would require the tenant to either pay all past due rent or enter into a mutually agreed upon payment plan with the owner of the residential real property. For purposes of the Act, this bill would define "immigration enforcement activities" to include any efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal immigration law, including any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would define "detention-related hardship" to mean, among other things, loss of income or financial support by the tenant or household member due to detention, arrest, or ordered removal of a tenant or household member by any federal law enforcement agency. This bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant subject to these provisions fees assessed for the late payment of that rental debt. The bill would prohibit a person from selling or assigning any unpaid debt as a result of detention-related hardship. The bill would prohibit a housing provider or tenant screening company from using an alleged debt as a result of detention-related hardship as a negative factor for the purpose of evaluating a prospective housing application or as the basis for refusing to rent a dwelling unit to an otherwise qualified prospective tenant. The bill would delete similar provisions related to debts as a result of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would require the Judicial Council to review its existing forms and develop new forms to effectuate these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030.
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies. Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent, among other reasons. This bill would prohibit a landlord from evicting for nonpayment of rent or nonrent fees, as defined, or charging or collecting late fees to, a tenant who is employed by the federal government or a federal contractor and whose income is materially affected by a government shutdown for the duration of, and 30 days following, a government shutdown. The bill would additionally require a court to stay any pending eviction action against the tenant during that time, as provided. The bill would require the tenant to provide specified documentation to a landlord or court, as applicable. The bill would require the deferred rent to be due and payable within 30 days of the date the tenant receives their first full paycheck containing retroactive backpay, as provided. This bill would impose civil penalties not to exceed $2,000 for any person who knowingly violates its provisions and would permit the tenant to raise a violation of its provisions as an affirmative defense in any action for unlawful detainer. The bill would specify that this affirmative defense does not apply to any unlawful detainer action other than an action based on the nonpayment of rent or nonrent fees. The bill would require the Judicial Council to adopt or modify forms as needed to implement these provisions. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
Existing law creates the Department of Insurance, headed by the Insurance Commissioner, and generally regulates classes of insurance, including residential property insurance. Existing department regulations prohibit an insurer from using a rating plan that does not take into account and reflect specified wildfire risk mitigation, including property-level building hardening measures. On and after January 1, 2028, this bill would prohibit an admitted insurer that offers or sells residential property insurance in this state from refusing to offer, sell, or renew a policy of residential property insurance for an applicant or insured whose property meets minimum home hardening and wildfire mitigation standards, except as provided. The bill would authorize an admitted insurer to apply to the commissioner for a temporary waiver of that prohibition in a particular geographic area of the state, as specified. On and after January 1, 2028, the bill would also require any residential property insurance offered or sold to, at a minimum, provide coverage equivalent in scope to the residential property coverage the admitted insurer most commonly offers or sells in this state. The bill would suspend or revoke an insurer's certificate of authority to offer or sell residential property insurance and automobile insurance in this state for five years if the admitted insurer habitually and as a matter of ordinary practice violates these provisions or if the admitted insurer offers residential property insurance in this state on and after January 1, 2026, but elects to cease offering that insurance rather than comply with these provisions.
Existing law establishes various advisory boards and commissions in state government with specified duties and responsibilities. This bill would create the California Latino Commission to address the inequities faced by the Latino community in housing, education, economic mobility, labor, and health care. The commission would consist of 9 members who have demonstrated expertise in specified areas, including housing policy and advocacy and economic development. The bill would task the commission with, among other things, collecting and analyzing data, developing recommendations, and monitoring the implementation of state programs and policies affecting the Latino community, as specified. The bill would require the commission to work with other state agencies and to submit an annual report to the Governor and the Legislature. The bill would establish that the commission and its activities would be supported by appropriations by the Legislature from the General Fund and grants from federal and private sources. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2036.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFEs) by the State Department of Social Services. Under existing law, a licensee of an RCFE that sends a notice of eviction to a resident is required to include in that notice specified information, including the effective date of the eviction and resources available to assist the resident in identifying alternative housing. Under existing law, the RCFE is also required to notify, or mail a copy of the notice to quit to, the resident's responsible person. Existing law requires that a licensee of an RCFE provide a resident with a 30-day notice of eviction, except where the department has approved the RCFE to provide a 3-day notice. Under existing law, a violation of those provisions is generally a misdemeanor. This bill would extend the length of notice that a licensee is required to provide to a resident to 30, 60, or 90 days, depending on the length of the resident's residency in the RCFE, among other factors relating to nonpayment of the rate for basic services within 10 days of the due date. The bill would additionally require a licensee of an RCFE to include in a notice of eviction documentation of the licensee's reasonable efforts to create a safe discharge plan, and would require the plan to include a list of the resident's posteviction needs, goals, and preferences, and a list of discharge locations that meet specified criteria, such as being financially practicable for the resident. The bill would require that a copy of the notice be provided to the local long-term care ombudsman. The bill would prohibit an RCFE from refusing entry to a resident or prohibit a resident from residing in the facility until the notice period has elapsed and the eviction process has concluded. The bill would make refusal of entry in violation of these provisions subject to civil and criminal penalties. Because the bill would create a new crime, 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.
(1) Existing law, the Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act, establishes the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) in the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development. Existing law, among other things, authorizes the I-Bank to issue bonds, make loans, and provide financial assistance for various types of projects that qualify as economic development or public development facilities. This bill would enact the Community Stabilization Act. The bill would require the I-Bank to develop and administer a program to issue a security, and to cease issuing a security on January 1, 2030. The bill would specify that the purpose of the program is to help stabilize property values in disaster-affected areas by allowing qualified investors, as defined, to purchase tradable securities, with the funding allocated to qualifying investment entities that purchase and manage residential land until it can be resold at fair market value. The bill would require profits from the land investments to be shared among investors and the I-Bank according to certain percentages, with qualifying investment entities being reimbursed for their administrative costs. This bill would establish various requirements for the security, including that it be tradeable, comply with specified municipal bonding requirements, and that it be funded by investments made by qualified investors using funds available pursuant to the federal Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The bill would require the security to repay the investment upon a liquidity event and within 7 years of the purchase of an investment property, and would describe a liquidity event as the refinance or sale of the investment property. This bill would require funds raised from the purchase of the security to be deposited in the Community Stabilization Fund, which would be created by the bill, and would require all moneys in the fund to be continuously appropriated to the I-Bank. The bill would require the I-Bank to allocate moneys in the fund to qualifying investment entities to be invested in the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura and in those areas that are covered by a state of disaster declared by the Governor. The bill would require a qualifying investment entity to meet prescribed requirements, including that it be a specified entity, including, among others, a nonprofit organization, as provided. The bill would also impose various requirements on the qualifying investment entity relating to the purchase, maintenance, and sale of the investment property, including, among other things, limiting the purchase of property to residential property that has been damaged or destroyed by the wildfires that began on January 7, 2025, in the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura, as specified. The bill would require the I-Bank to submit a final report on the program to the Legislature, the Governor, and the Department of Finance no later than January 1, 2034, as specified. By establishing a new continuously appropriated fund, the Community Stabilization Fund, this bill would make an appropriation. (2) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura. (3) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law establishes the California Housing Finance Agency in the Department of Housing and Community Development, and authorizes the agency to, among other things, make loans to finance affordable housing, including residential structures, housing developments, multifamily rental housing, special needs housing, and other forms of housing, as specified. Existing law establishes the California Dream for All Program to provide shared appreciation loans to qualified first-time homebuyers, as specified. Existing law establishes in the State Treasury the California Dream for All Fund, which is continuously appropriated for expenditure pursuant to the program, as specified. This bill would require, upon establishment of the certification process for the descendants of American slavery established by the Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery, at least 10% of the moneys in the fund to be reserved for applicants who meet the requirements for a loan under the program and have been certified as descendants of formerly enslaved people, as specified. This bill would become operative only if SB 518 of the 2025–26 Regular Session is enacted and takes effect on or before January 1, 2027, and establishes the Bureau for Descendants for American Slavery.
Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households unless the local agency makes written findings as to one of certain sets of conditions, as specified. Existing law defines, for its purposes, a housing development project as a use consisting of, among other things, mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses meeting one of several conditions, including that at least 23 of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use. This bill would revise the definition of "housing development project" to, in the case of mixed-use developments with at least 23 of the new or converted square footage designated for residential use, require that no portion of the project be designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except as specified. This bill would correct cross-references in the Housing Accountability Act. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1308 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1308 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Existing law requires each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to amend its general plan relative to the data and analysis contained in the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, as specified and to amend its zoning ordinance consistent with the general plan. Existing law prohibits the legislative body of a city or county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from entering into a development agreement for property that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress on construction of a flood protection system that will result in flood protection equal to or greater than the urban level of flood protection in urban or urbanizing areas intended to be protected by the system, which, except as provided, shall be achieved by 2025 for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees. Existing law similarly prohibits each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley from approving a discretionary permit or other discretionary entitlement that would result in the construction of a new building or construction that would result in an increase in allowed occupancy for an existing building, or a ministerial permit that would result in the construction of a new residence, for a project that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. Existing law similarly requires the legislative body of each city and county within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley to deny approval of a tentative map or a parcel map for a subdivision that is located within a flood hazard zone after the amendments described above are complete unless the city or county makes a specified finding. Among the possible findings, is that the local flood agency has made adequate progress toward the urban level of flood protection as described above. This bill would include in the exceptions to the requirement that the urban level of flood protection be achieved for urban and urbanizing areas protected by project levees by 2025, specified areas located in the City of Marysville, the City of Sacramento, the County of Sacramento, the County of Sutter, and the County of Yuba that shall, instead, be required to achieve the urban level of flood protection by 2030. The bill would authorize the Department of Water Resources to require a city or county listed above to contribute its fair and reasonable share of any property damage caused by a flood in its respective jurisdiction, as specified, until the city or county finds the area has met the urban level of flood protection. The bill would make a related technical change. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Sacramento, County of Sutter, County of Yuba, City of Marysville, and City of Sacramento.
