The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project, as defined for purposes of the act, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That act states that it shall not be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring a housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, except as provided. The act further provides that for its purposes, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. The act requires a housing development project to be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application, as specified, was submitted, except as otherwise provided. The act defines "ordinances, policies, and standards" to include general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and policies of a local agency, as defined, including those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions. This bill would include in the definition of "ordinances, policies, and standards" materials requirements, postentitlement permit standards, and any rules, regulations, determinations, and other requirements adopted or implemented by other public agencies, as defined. The Permit Streamlining Act, among other things, requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain timeframes, as specified. The act requires public agencies to compile one or more lists that specify in detail the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. The act requires a public agency, upon its determination that an application for a development project is incomplete, to include a list and a thorough description of the specific information needed to complete the application. This bill would provide that for the purposes of the Permit Streamlining Act, a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision adopted or implemented by a public agency, as defined, if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity, except as specified. By imposing additional duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law creates a housing authority in each county or city, which functions upon the adoption of a specified resolution by the relevant governing body. Existing law authorizes these housing authorities, within their jurisdictions, to construct, reconstruct, improve, alter, or repair all or part of any housing project. Existing law establishes various programs that provide housing assistance. This bill would enact the Social Housing Act and would create the California Housing Authority as an independent state body, the mission of which would be to ensure that social housing developments that are produced and acquired align with the goals of eliminating the gap between housing production and regional housing needs assessment targets and preserving affordable housing. The bill would prescribe a definition of social housing that would describe, in addition to housing owned by the authority, housing owned by other entities, as specified, provided that all social housing developed or authorized by the authority would be owned by the authority. This bill would prescribe the composition of the California Housing Authority Board, which would govern the authority, and which would be composed of appointed members and members who would be elected by residents of social housing developments, as specified. The bill would set forth the powers and duties of the authority and the board, including the requirement that the authority and the board annually prepare and submit a business plan and related information to the Governor and Legislature, as specified. The bill would also require the board to provide for regular audits of the authority's accounts and records, as specified. The bill would require the authority to seek to achieve revenue neutrality, as defined, and would require the authority to seek to recuperate the cost of development and operations over the life of its properties through mechanisms that maximize the number of Californians who can be housed without experiencing rent burden. This bill would require the authority to prioritize the development of specified property, including vacant parcels and parcels near transit, and would establish a process for the annual determination of required social housing units. Under the bill, social housing would accommodate a mix of household income ranges and would provide specified protections for residents, who would have the right to participate in the operation and management of the units in which they reside. This bill would require the California Housing Authority to employ 2 leasing models in creating social housing, referred to as the rental model and the ownership model, and would specify the characteristics of both models. Under the rental model, the authority would extend a one-year lease to individuals who commit to a minimum of one year of residence and would require the authority to set rents, as specified. Under the ownership model, the authority would extend a 99-year lease, in the form of a limited equity arrangement, as defined, to individuals who commit to a minimum 5-year term of residence, and would authorize the authority to act as a lender for residents. The bill would specify how the units may be sold and transferred. The bill would establish eligibility requirements for social housing residents and would provide for the selection of residents by lottery, as specified, provided that people who may have been displaced from a property as part of its development would be granted a preference for occupancy. The bill, among other things, would require the authority to accept a local jurisdiction's preference for a project parcel if specified conditions are met. This bill would establish the Social Housing Revolving Loan Fund within the State Treasury to provide, upon appropriation by the Legislature, zero-interest loans for the purposes of constructing housing to accommodate a mix of household incomes. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact subsequent legislation to provide financing for the activities of the authority through the issuance of general obligation bonds. The bill would authorize the authority to issue revenue bonds, as specified.
Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires each state or local agency, upon a request for a copy of records that reasonably describes an identifiable record or records, to make the records promptly available to any person upon payment of fees covering direct costs of duplication, or a statutory fee if applicable, except with respect to public records exempt from disclosure by express provisions of law. Existing law requires, upon request, an exact copy to be provided unless it is impracticable to do so. This bill would specify that a recording of a call or a written communication that is maintained by a state or local agency that reports or describes an incident, as defined, occurring at a private detention facility, and specified records relating to that call or communication in the possession of a law enforcement agency, are not confidential, and would require an agency to disclose those records upon request to any member of the public. By requiring agencies to disclose certain records to the public, the bill would increase the duties of local officials and create a state-mandated local program. Existing law specifies that, except as provided, the act does not require the disclosure of records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of intelligence information or security procedures of, the office of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, the Office of Emergency Services and any state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local agency for correctional, law enforcement, or licensing purposes. This bill would also except the above-described requirements relating to records relating to private detention facilities from that provision, but would specify that those requirements do not apply to the office of the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, the Department of Consumer Affairs, or any state entity within the Department of Consumer Affairs, as specified. The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 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 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, 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.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each city, county, or city and county to prepare and adopt a general plan for its jurisdiction that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element. Under existing law, a part of the housing element is an assessment of housing needs, which includes the locality's share of the regional housing need. Under existing law, the appropriate council of governments, or for cities and counties without a council of governments, the Department of Housing and Community Development, adopts a final regional housing need plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each locality in the region. Existing law authorizes a local government to conduct a review or appeal regarding allocation data provided by the department or the council of governments regarding, among other things, the locality's share of the regional housing need. This bill would authorize a local government within the same county as a tribe to enter into a voluntary agreement with a tribe to allow new tribal housing development projects to count toward the locality's share of the regional housing needs allocation, as specified. The bill would prohibit a local government from requiring a tribe to waive sovereign immunity in order to enter into a voluntary agreement pursuant to these provisions. The bill would define various terms for these provisions. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature that the Department of Housing and Community Development be encouraged to approve units in a tribal housing development as counting toward the locality's regional housing needs allocation, as specified. 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.
Existing law within the Planning and Zoning Law describes various reforms and incentives enacted by the Legislature to facilitate and expedite the construction of affordable housing. Existing law within the Planning and Zoning Law, in certain civil actions or proceedings against a public entity that has issued specified approvals for a housing development, authorizes a court to award all reasonably incurred costs of suit to a prevailing public entity or nonprofit housing corporation that is a real party in interest and the permit applicant of the low- or moderate-income housing if the court makes specified findings. This bill, where the applicant for a housing development is a prevailing party in an action brought by the applicant to enforce the public agency's compliance with a housing reform law as applied to the applicant's housing development project, would entitle an applicant for a housing development project to reasonable attorney's fees and costs and would require a court to impose fines on a local agency, as specified. The bill would extend any period of limitation for actions under any state law for a period of 60 days beginning on the date the applicant provides written notice to the local agency indicating its intent to commence an action. The bill would prohibit a public agency from requiring the applicant to indemnify, defend, or hold harmless the public agency in any action alleging the public agency violated the applicant's rights or deprived the applicant of the benefits or protection provide by a housing reform law. The bill would define housing reform law as a law that establishes or facilitates protections for the benefit of applicants for housing development projects or imposes limitations on a public agency for the benefit of housing development projects.
(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.
Existing law, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 (act) , until January 1, 2033, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for an affordable housing development or a mixed-income housing development that meets specified objective standards and affordability and site criteria, including being located within a zone where office, retail, or parking are a principally permitted use. The act makes a development that meets those objective standards and affordability and site criteria a use by right and subject to one of 2 streamlined, ministerial review processes depending on, among other things, the affordability requirements applicable to the project. The act requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to undertake at least 2 studies, one completed on or before January 1, 2027, and one completed on or before January 1, 2031, on the outcomes of the act. This bill would provide that, for purposes of determining whether a property or site satisfies the criteria, objective development standards, or other requirements for receiving streamlined, ministerial review under the act, a local government's review of the property or site is limited to the area described as being physically disturbed by construction in the application for streamlined, ministerial review and does not include, unless expressly stated otherwise, other contiguous or noncontiguous areas even if under the ownership or control of the project proponent. The bill would provide that easements for public right-of-way, public or private utilities, or other public improvements in, under, or over the property shall not make the property ineligible to receive streamlined, ministerial review for either affordable or mixed-income housing developments. This bill would also expand the eligibility for the above-described streamlined, ministerial review for mixed-income housing developments to include developments located in a campus development zone, as defined, as long as the development meets certain affordability requirements and objective standards, as provided. The bill would require the outcomes of projects built under campus development zones to be reported in the January 1, 2031, outcomes report. The bill would also make related findings and declarations. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. By expanding the scope of projects eligible for streamlined, ministerial approval as described above, this bill would expand the scope of the exemption from CEQA for ministerial projects. Existing law includes certain setback requirements in the objective standards that a mixed-income development project must meet to be subject to the above-referenced streamlined, ministerial review process. In this regard, existing law requires all parking to be set back at least 25 feet. This bill would instead impose that setback requirement only on parking that is aboveground. By changing the criteria local agencies must follow for the approval of 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.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and 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. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to determine whether the housing element is in substantial compliance with those provisions. Existing law requires the department to designate jurisdictions as prohousing pursuant to emergency regulations adopted by the department, as prescribed. Existing law requires that jurisdictions that are prohousing and that are in substantial compliance with specified provisions be awarded additional points or preference in the scoring of applications for specified state programs. Existing law defines "prohousing local policies" for these purposes and specifies a nonexhaustive list of examples of those policies, including local financial incentives for housing and adoption of zoning allowing for use by right for residential and mixed-use development. This bill would include in the definition of "prohousing local policies" policies that keep people housed, and would include additional examples of prohousing local policies under the above-described provisions, as specified. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.9 of the Government Code proposed by AB 36 to be operative only if this bill and AB 36 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
