Existing law requires a mortgage servicer to comply with applicable federal guidance regarding borrower options following a forbearance relating to the COVID-19 emergency. This bill would authorize a borrower who is experiencing financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on a specified residential mortgage loan due directly to the wildfire disaster described in the proclamation of a state of emergency issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on January 7, 2025, or the federally declared disaster, declared on January 8, 2025, related to the Eaton Wildfire, the Palisades Fire, and the Straight-line Winds, to request forbearance on their residential mortgage loan, as prescribed. The bill would limit eligibility for that forbearance to loans that are secured by residential real property improved by 4 or fewer residential units. The bill would require the borrower to affirm that they are experiencing a financial hardship due to the wildfire disaster. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, require a mortgage servicer to offer mortgage payment forbearance of a period of up to an initial 90 days, which shall be extended at the request of the borrower in 90-day increments, up to a maximum forbearance period of 12 months. The bill would also prohibit a mortgage servicer from assessing any late fees to the borrower's account or charging a default rate of interest during the forbearance period. The bill would provide that the forbearance period includes any period of forbearance related to the wildfire disaster that a mortgage servicer has provided to a borrower before the effective date of these provisions. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to report the credit obligations of borrowers under a disaster-related forbearance plan in compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. For accounts granted disaster-related mortgage payment relief, the bill would prohibit mortgage servicers from furnishing information during the forbearance period indicating that the payments are in forbearance and would require them to report the credit obligation or account as current or delinquent, as specified. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer from initiating any judicial or nonjudicial foreclosure process, moving for a foreclosure judgment or order of sale, or executing a foreclosure-related eviction or foreclosure during the period of forbearance. This bill would require the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation to post specified information on its website including links to the provisions of servicing guidelines pertaining to disaster-related forbearance relief for federally backed loans and a dedicated telephone number for borrowers seeking assistance. 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.
(1) Existing law establishes various programs, administered by the State Department of Social Services, to assist individuals experiencing, or at risk of, homelessness, including, among other programs, the CalWORKs Housing Support Program, the Home Safe Program, the Bringing Families Home Program, and the Housing and Disability Income Advocacy Program. This bill would require counties opting to participate in any of those programs to have written program policies and make them available to the public, and to implement and conduct county-level complaint resolution processes according to minimum requirements developed by the department, as specified. The bill would require the department to develop program guidance on a procedure for counties to inform recipients in writing of housing-related services and financial assistance being provided to the recipient, would provide program recipients with the right to file a request with the department for a state administrative hearing for county actions resulting in a reduction or discontinuance of housing-related services and financial assistance, as specified, and would require the department to establish criteria for recipients to receive housing-related services and financial assistance pending the resolution of a complaint and a state hearing. The bill would require the department to consult with the County Welfare Directors Association of California, counties, and advocates for program applicants and recipients on the development of the previously described processes, and would authorize the department to implement and administer these provisions by means of all-county letters or similar written instructions. (2) Existing law establishes the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, under which each county provides cash assistance and other benefits to qualified low-income families using federal, state, and county funds. Existing law generally requires a recipient of CalWORKs to participate in welfare-to-work activities as a condition of eligibility. Existing law specifies the sequence of employment-related activities a welfare-to-work participant is required to undertake, which includes orientation and appraisal and, commencing July 1, 2026, or, if automation is necessary, the later of July 1, 2026, or when the department notifies the Legislature that the California Statewide Automated Welfare System can perform the necessary automation, if eligible, family stabilization, substance abuse, mental health, or domestic violence services. Existing law, as it relates to family stabilization, substance abuse, mental health, or domestic violence services, requires the recipient to make their election verbally or in writing on the welfare-to-work plan. This bill would remove the requirement that the recipient make their election verbally or in writing on the welfare-to-work plan. Existing law, commencing July 1, 2026, or, if automation is necessary, the later of July 1, 2026, or when the department notifies the Legislature that the California Statewide Automated Welfare System can perform the necessary automation, requires the department to develop an updated, streamlined appraisal tool to replace the Online CalWORKs Appraisal Tool (OCAT) and exempts a contract necessary to obtain licenses for OCAT and the alternative appraisal tool developed by the department from, among other things, the Public Contract Code and the State Contracting Manual. Existing law, commencing July 1, 2026, or, if automation is necessary, the later of July 1, 2026, or when the department notifies the Legislature that the California Statewide Automated Welfare System can perform the necessary automation, requires an assessment to be available upon completion of orientation and appraisal and, at the participant's option, authorizes the assessment to incorporate the OCAT, as specified. The bill would make technical corrections to the above provisions relating to the OCAT and the alternative appraisal tool developed by the department. Existing law requires counties, as part of the administration of the CalWORKs program, to use a semiannual report form and, to the extent permitted by federal law, provide recipients with a prepopulated semiannual report form. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services to complete final policy guidance for changes to the prepopulated semiannual report form by August 15, 2025. This bill would delete the requirement that the department complete final policy guidance relating to the semiannual report form by August 15, 2025. (3) Existing law establishes the Adoption Assistance Program (AAP) , administered by the State Department of Social Services, to benefit children residing in foster homes by providing the stability and security of permanent homes. Existing law authorizes AAP payments for placement in an out-of-state residential treatment facility if one or more of the adoptive parents reside in the state in which the residential treatment facility is located and the responsible public agency has confirmed that placement is necessary. Existing law defines a "responsible public agency" to mean either the department or the licensed county adoption agency responsible for making AAP determinations for a child. This bill would revise the definition of "responsible public agency" to include all county adoption agencies responsible for making AAP determinations for a child without regard to whether the agency is licensed. (4) Existing federal law establishes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) , known in California as CalFresh, under which supplemental nutrition assistance benefits allocated to the state by the federal government are distributed to eligible individuals by each county. Under existing federal law, beginning in fiscal year 2028, a state's cost share for SNAP benefits will be determined based on the state's payment error rate. Under that federal law, if a state's payment error rate is less than 6%, the state's cost share is 0%, with increasing cost share for the state if the payment error rate is above that threshold. This bill would, until October 1, 2027, and when necessary to reduce the CalFresh payment error rate, authorize the State Department of Social Services to implement and administer the CalFresh program by means of all-county letters and emergency regulations, as specified. The bill would require the department to engage in stakeholder consultation starting in September 2025 and continuing through the duration of the multiyear activities. The bill would also require the department, beginning in November 2025 through November 2027, to update the Legislature, including specified information, on a quarterly basis on the implementation of the multiyear activities. Existing federal law generally prohibits a resident of an institution from receiving supplemental nutrition assistance benefits. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services, if the department deems it necessary to maximize CalFresh enrollment outcomes or employment placement success rates for individuals reentering the community from the state prison or a county jail, to submit to the United States Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service a request to waive that prohibition to allow for preenrollment of applicants prior to their release. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services to establish a CalFresh workgroup by February 1, 2026, composed of members with specified backgrounds, to meet no less than quarterly. Existing law requires the workgroup to create and submit a report to the department and to the Legislature by August 31, 2027, and by August 31 annually thereafter, through 2030, with its recommendations for a state reentry process incorporating the necessary resources for transition from state prison or county jail to obtaining CalFresh benefits upon reentry into the community. This bill would delay the establishment of the workgroup to February 1, 2028, and would delay the reporting period by 2 years. (5) This bill would appropriate $3,200,000 from the General Fund to the State Department of Social Services for automation related to CalFresh payment error rate mitigation and implementation of federal H.R. 1 (Public Law 119-21) . (6) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as a bill providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
Existing law governs the hiring of residential dwelling units. Existing law, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, prohibits, until January 1, 2030, an owner of residential real property from terminating the tenancy of certain tenants without just cause, either at-fault or no-fault of the tenant. The act exempts certain types of residential real properties from that prohibition, including, among others, housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years. This bill would exclude housing built to replace a previous housing unit that was subject to the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, was substantially damaged or destroyed by a disaster, as defined, and was issued a certificate of occupancy before that housing unit was substantially damaged or destroyed, from the above-described exemption from the just cause requirements. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1946.2 of the Civil Code proposed by AB 1529 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1529 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
The Budget Act of 2018 appropriated $50,000,000 to the Board of State and Community Corrections for a grant program, known as the Adult Reentry Grant Program, for the purpose of awarding competitive grants to community based organizations to support offenders formerly incarcerated in state prison. The Budget Act of 2018 allocated a specified amount of those funds for, among other things, rental assistance, rehabilitation of existing property or buildings, and to support the warm hand-off and reentry of offenders transitioning from prison to communities. Subsequent budget acts have continued to fund the program. This bill, instead, commencing July 1, 2026, and upon appropriation of funds, would transfer the administration of the grant program to the Department of Housing and Community Development. The bill would require the department, on or before December 1, 2026, to modify the grant program to provide 5-year renewable grants to geographically diverse regional administrators responsible for funding permanent supportive housing and reentry services for eligible people, as specified. The bill would require the department to issue proposed guidelines or a draft notice, as specified, establishing the grant program and require the department to competitively score applicants applying for grant funds as regional administrators. The bill would require the department to work collaboratively with the State Department of Health Care Services, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and homeless continuums of care, and seek to work collaboratively with county probation departments, to establish a process for referrals of people eligible to participate in the program, as specified. The bill would also require the department to establish specified benchmarks to promote and track ideal outcomes from the program. This bill would require the department to distribute program funds by executing contracts with awarded regional administrators and would impose certain requirements on those regional administrators. The bill would prescribe eligibility requirements for a person scheduled for release from, or who has been be formerly incarcerated in, state prison, to participate in the program. The bill would require program funds to be used for specified purposes, including specified administrative fees, permanent housing, rental and operating subsidies, incentives to landlords, and voluntary multidisciplinary services, as specified. The bill would require the department, upon implementation of the program, to design an evaluation and hire an independent evaluator to assess outcomes from the program, and would require the evaluation to be submitted to specified committees of the Legislature. This bill would require the board to continue to oversee and administer existing program grants that have not yet expired, using resources allocated to the board through funds allocated by the Budget Act of 2025. This bill would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to establish a process to engage an individual scheduled for discharge, within at least 210 days of the scheduled release date, for the purpose of assessing the individual's risk of homelessness upon discharge, as specified.
Existing law establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) program for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as specified. Existing law provides for the allocation of funding under the program among continuums of care, cities, counties, and tribes in 6 rounds, with rounds 1 to 5, inclusive, administered by the Interagency Council on Homelessness and round 6 administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as provided. Existing law requires a program applicant to provide specified information through data collection, reporting, performance monitoring, and accountability framework, as established by the council. This bill would enact the Functional Zero Act, which, beginning with the next round of HHAP program applications, or when updates to the regionally coordinated homeless action plan are next required to be submitted, would require an applicant to provide information relating to its efforts to address homelessness in its jurisdiction, including an assessment of what would be required for the applicant to achieve and maintain both functional zero, which the bill would define as a milestone indicating a community has measurably solved homelessness, as specified, and functional zero unsheltered, which the bill would define as a necessary milestone in the effort to achieve functional zero indicating that sufficient housing options of all types to accommodate a jurisdiction's unsheltered, chronically homeless population based on its most recent homeless point-in-time count. The bill would require, as part of the assessment of progress toward functional zero, applicants to include, at a minimum, an analysis of the number of housing units of all types needed to achieve functional zero in a jurisdiction, and as part of the assessment of progress toward functional zero unsheltered, a financial model assessing the needs for investment in prescribed areas and further analysis of, among other things, funding programs that provide housing or services to persons experiencing homelessness. The bill would also require an applicant to provide information regarding the applicant's implementation of local homeless housing incentives, as provided, and to demonstrate its efforts to include small cities, as defined, in its regionally coordinated homeless action plan, as specified.
Existing law governs the hiring of residential dwelling units and requires a landlord to provide specified notice to tenants prior to an increase in rent. Existing law, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, prescribes statewide limits on the application of local rent control with regard to certain properties. That act, among other things, authorizes an owner of residential real property to establish the initial and all subsequent rental rates for a dwelling or unit that meets specified criteria, subject to certain limitations. This bill would make it unlawful for any person to sell, license, or otherwise provide to 2 or more persons a rental pricing algorithm, as defined, with the intent or reasonable expectation that it be used by 2 or more persons, as specified, to set rental terms, as defined, for residential premises. The bill would make it unlawful for a person to set or adopt rental terms based on the recommendation of a rental pricing algorithm if the person knows or should know that the rental pricing algorithm processes nonpublic competitor data, as defined, to set rental terms and that the pricing algorithm or the recommendation of the algorithm was used by another person to set or recommend a rental term for residential premises in the same market. Existing law establishes the Attorney General as the head of the Department of Justice, with charge of all legal matters in which the state is interested, except as specified. Existing law imposes various requirements on the Attorney General related to consumer protection, including, among others, the supervision of charitable trusts and the enforcement of antitrust laws. This bill would authorize the Attorney General, and the city attorney or county counsel in the jurisdiction in which the rental unit is located, to file a civil action for a violation of the bill, as specified, and would authorize a person who is harmed by a violation of the bill to file a civil action, as specified.
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.
