Existing property tax law, pursuant to constitutional authorization, provides for a "welfare exemption" for property used exclusively for religious, hospital, scientific, or charitable purposes and that is owned or operated by certain types of nonprofit entities, if certain qualifying criteria are met. That law provides a partial welfare exemption in the case of residential rental property used for lower income households, as specified, calculated as that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving lower income households represents of the total number of residential units. This bill would provide a partial welfare exemption in the case of certain residential rental property used for low- and moderate-income households. The partial exemption would be equal to that percentage of the value of the property that is equal to the percentage that the number of units serving low- and moderate-income households, as defined, represents of the total number of residential units, as provided. The bill would require an owner to make specified certifications relating to the use of the property. By expanding the duties of local tax officials, and by expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would declare that its provisions are severable. 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 requires the state to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation. This bill would provide that, notwithstanding those provisions, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill. This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.
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.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of that county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. For the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine the existing and projected regional housing need, as provided, and requires the appropriate council of governments, or for cities and counties without a council of governments, the department, to adopt a final regional housing need plan allocating a share of the regional housing need to each Existing"?> city or county, as provided. Existing law requires the housing element to include an analysis of any special housing needs, including, among others, families and persons in need of emergency shelter. Existing law requires a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the department that includes, among other things, the city's or county's progress in meeting its share of regional housing needs, as specified, and number of units approved and disapproved in the prior year. The bill would authorize a city or county that met or exceeded its need for emergency shelter capacity and that provides committed support for interim housing, as defined, to report the number of interim housing units receiving that support that are approved, as specified, as units approved or disapproved for acutely low income households, for purposes of the annual progress report. The bill would require the department to allow approved interim housing units to account for up to 50% of the city's or county's share of the regional need for housing for acutely low income households, as specified. Existing law requires the department to publish, by December 31, 2026, advisory guidance, including, but not limited to, sample analyses and programs, pertaining to special housing needs for acutely low and extremely low income households and programs to assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of acutely low income households, as specified. This bill would require the guidance to include advice regarding the impact of the above-described requirements regarding interim housing and pertaining to acutely low and extremely low income households, specifically how interim housing, as defined, that does not meet the United States Census Bureau guidelines definition of a "housing unit" may be reported in the annual progress report.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires each electrical corporation, not later than February 28, 2021, to file an advice letter for, and requires the commission, not later than June 30, 2021, to approve, a new tariff or rule that authorizes each electrical corporation to design and deploy all electrical distribution infrastructure on the utility side of the customer's meter for all customers installing separately metered infrastructure to support charging stations, other than those in single-family residences. Existing law requires the commission to establish strategies and quantifiable metrics to maximize the use of feasible and cost-effective electric vehicle grid integration, as defined, by January 1, 2030, as specified. This bill would require the commission, on or before March 1, 2027, to establish targets for each electrical corporation to install electric vehicle charging stations at multifamily housing properties. The bill would require the commission to ensure the targets reduce costs for all ratepayers, and to require electrical corporations to make annual progress reports and to provide to the commission corresponding maps that identify the proposed multifamily housing properties within its service territory where use will be highest based on distribution system planning and experience with electric vehicle charging station infrastructure. The bill would require the commission, in establishing the targets, to determine whether to impose certain requirements on an electrical corporation, including a requirement that an electrical corporation recover all costs, to the extent not covered by nonratepayer funding, for deploying the electric vehicle charging stations, including the costs for administration and implementation, as operations and maintenance costs rather than as capital costs. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the provisions of the bill would be a part of the act and therefore a violation of the bill's requirements, or a violation of a commission action implementing the bill's requirements, would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The California Constitution declares that all property is taxable and establishes or authorizes various exemptions from tax for real property, including a homeowners' exemption in the amount of $7,000 of the full value of a dwelling unless the dwelling receives another real property exemption. If the Legislature increases the homeowners' exemption, the California Constitution requires that the Legislature provide a benefit increase to qualified renters comparable to the average increase in benefits to homeowners. The California Constitution and existing property tax law establish a veterans' exemption in the amount of $4,000 for a veteran who meets certain military service requirements, including that the veteran is serving in or has served in and has been discharged under honorable conditions from one of specified branches of the United States military, and generally exempts from property taxation the same value of property of a deceased veteran's unmarried spouse and parents. The California Constitution authorizes and existing property tax law establishes a disabled veterans' exemption in the amount of $100,000 or $150,000 for the principal place of residence of a veteran or a veteran's spouse, including an unmarried surviving spouse, if the veteran, because of an injury incurred in military service, is blind in both eyes, has lost the use of 2 or more limbs, or is totally disabled, as those terms are defined, or if the veteran has, as a result of a service-connected injury or disease, died while on active duty in military service. Existing law prohibits receiving the veterans' exemption on property owned by an unmarried person who owns more than $5,000 of property or a married person who owns more than $10,000 of property. Existing law prohibits receiving the deceased veterans' exemption on property owned by a deceased veteran's unmarried spouse who owns more than $10,000 of property, a deceased veteran's unmarried parent who owns more than $5,000 of property, or a deceased veteran's married parent who owns more than $10,000 of property. This measure would add the United States Space Force to the military branches, the service in which satisfies the veterans' exemption military service requirement described above. This measure would allow a dwelling that receives the veterans' exemption or the disabled veteran's exemption to also receive the homeowners' exemption. The measure would authorize the Legislature to exempt property eligible for the veterans' exemption in an amount up to the full value of the property. If the Legislature increases the homeowners' exemption, the measure would require that the Legislature provide the same increase in the veterans' exemption, except as limited by the full value of the property. The bill would remove the above-described prohibitions on a property receiving the veterans' or deceased veterans' exemption based on the amount of property that a veteran or veteran's parent or spouse owns.
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.
This Senate Resolution recognizes the importance of affordable homeownership for economic stability and racial equity in California, particularly for lower-income families and communities of color. It highlights how nonprofit-led programs like Habitat for Humanity provide long-term affordability through mechanisms such as deed restrictions and shared equity while engaging local volunteers and strengthening neighborhoods. The resolution calls attention to California's low homeownership rate and housing shortage, urging state officials to prioritize affordable home supply in their policies and budget decisions.
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.
Existing law, the Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act, requires legal counsel to be appointed to represent low-income parties in civil matters involving critical issues affecting basic human needs in courts selected by the Judicial Council. The act requires the Judicial Council to develop one or more programs to provide competitive grants to provide legal counsel to low-income persons who require legal services in civil matters involving specific types of civil matters, including, among others, housing-related matters, probate conservatorships, guardianships, and domestic violence and civil harassment restraining orders. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to consider various factors, including, among others, the unmet need for legal services in the geographic area to be served, in selecting and renewing participating programs. Existing law requires program applicants to, among other things, describe how the program would be administered and the means by which the program would serve the particular needs of the community, such as by providing representation to limited-English-speaking clients. This bill would require courts to provide the Judicial Council each month with information regarding unlawful detainer cases, as specified, aggregated by ZIP Code. The bill would require the Judicial Council to make that information publicly available online every 4 months.
Existing law governs procedures for specified civil actions, including those brought pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Existing law requires a plaintiff to furnish an undertaking as security for costs and damages that may be incurred by the defendant under certain circumstances, such as when the plaintiff challenges a low- or moderate-income housing development project for the purpose of delaying or thwarting the project. This bill would provide that, in a civil action brought to challenge a project that will engage in fire prevention activities, including those brought pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, 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 or seeking by the plaintiff of particular relief, including injunctive relief, would result in preventing or delaying the project. The bill would require the defendant to show that the action is without merit and that it was brought in bad faith, vexatiously, for the purpose of delay, or to thwart the project. The bill would permit a plaintiff in responding to such a motion to request that the amount of the undertaking be limited because it would result in economic hardship, as specified. This bill would authorize the court to order an undertaking not to exceed $500,000 or to decline to require an undertaking if the court finds that it would cause the plaintiff to suffer undue economic hardship. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
