Asm. Buffy Wicks

(1) The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards. Existing law requires, among other objective planning standards, that the development be subject to a requirement mandating a minimum percentage of below market rate housing based on one of 3 specified conditions. Existing law requires, among those conditions, a development to dedicate a minimum of 10% of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making below 80% of the area median income, if the project contains more than 10 units of housing and the locality did not timely submit its latest production report to the Department of Housing and Community Development, or that production report reflects that there were fewer units of above moderate-income housing issued building permits than were required for the regional housing needs assessment cycle for that reporting period. Existing law also requires a development proponent to commit to record a land use restriction or covenant providing that any lower income housing units required pursuant to these provisions will remain affordable, as provided. This bill would modify that condition to authorize a development that is located within the San Francisco Bay area, as defined, to instead dedicate 20% of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making at or below 120% of the area median income with the average income of the units at or below 100% of the area median income, except as provided. The bill would prohibit the rent or sale price charged for those units that are dedicated to housing affordable to households between 80% and 120% of area median income from exceeding 30% of the gross income of the household. The bill would make a conforming change by expanding the above-described requirement to commit to record a land use restriction or covenant to also require such a land use restriction or covenant for moderate income housing units, as defined. The bill would provide that a development proponent may use a unit of affordable housing to satisfy the affordability requirements provided by these provisions and any other state or local affordability requirement, as provided. (2) Existing law requires that at least 23 of the square footage of a development receiving approval pursuant to these provisions must be designated for residential use. This bill would provide that "square footage," for these purposes, does not include underground space, such as basements or underground parking garages. (3) Existing law requires a local government to provide a development proponent written documentation if a development conflicts with the objective planning standards described above within specified time frames, which must include a description and explanation of the conflicts. This bill would provide that a development is consistent with objective planning standards if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the development is consistent with the standards. (4) Existing law provides that approval of a development pursuant to these provisions does not expire if (A) the project includes public investment in housing affordability, beyond tax credits, and (B) 50% of the units are affordable to households making below 80% of the area median income. Existing law provides that approval of other projects pursuant to these provisions automatically expires after 3 years, except as specified. This bill would provide that the approval of projects that do not meet the criteria above remains valid for 3 years from the date of the final action establishing that approval, or from the date of a final judgment upholding that approval, except as specified. (5) Existing law prohibits a local government from adopting any requirement on the basis that the project is eligible to receive ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. The bill would require a local government to issue a subsequent permit, as defined, if the application substantially complies with the development as it was approved. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any procedure or requirement on subsequent permits that is not imposed on developments that are not approved pursuant to these provisions. (6) Existing law provides that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to an action taken by a state agency or local government to lease, convey, or encumber land owned by the local government or to provide financial assistance to a project that was approved pursuant to these provisions to be used for housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income. This bill would additionally provide that CEQA does not apply to an action taken by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District to lease, convey, or encumber land owned by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, or for the lease, including any decisions associated with that lease, of certain land owned by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, that is related to a development that was approved for streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions that is to be used for housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income. The bill would additionally provide that CEQA does not apply to an action taken by a state agency, local government, or the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District to approve improvements located on land owned by the local government or the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District that are necessary to implement a project that receives approval pursuant to these provisions to be used for housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income. (7) Existing law requires the objective planning standards to include a requirement that a development certify to the locality that a skilled and trained workforce will be used to complete the development, if the development meets certain standards, including that the development consists of a specified number of units that are not 100% subsidized affordable housing. Existing law defines "subsidized" to mean units that are price or rent restricted such that the units are permanently affordable to very low and lower income households. This bill would modify the definition of "subsidized" to no longer require the units to be made permanently affordable to very low and lower income households. (8) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65913.4 of the Government Code proposed by SB 235 and by SB 592 to be operative only if this bill and SB 235 or SB 592, or both, are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (9) 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 prescribes requirements for the disposal of surplus land by a local agency. Existing law defines "local agency" for these purposes as every city, county, city and county, and district, including school districts of any kind or class, empowered to acquire and hold real property. Existing law defines "surplus land" for these purposes as land owned by any local agency that is determined to be no longer necessary for the agency's use, except property being held by the agency for the purpose of exchange. Existing law defines "exempt surplus land" to mean land that is less than 5,000 square feet in area, less than the applicable minimum legal residential building lot size, or has no record access and is less than 10,000 square feet in area, and that is not contiguous to land owned by a state or local agency and used for park, recreational, open-space, or affordable housing. This bill would expand the definition of "local agency" to include sewer, water, utility, and local and regional park districts, joint powers authorities, successor agencies to former redevelopment agencies, housing authorities, and other political subdivisions of this state and any instrumentality thereof that is empowered to acquire and hold real property, thereby requiring these entities to comply with these requirements for the disposal of surplus land. The bill would specify that the term "district" includes all districts within the state, and that this change is declaratory of existing law. The bill would revise the definition of "surplus land" to mean land owned in fee simple by any local agency, for which the local agency's governing body takes formal action, in a regular public meeting, declaring, supported by written findings, that the land is surplus and is not necessary for the agency's use, as defined. The bill would provide that "surplus land" for these purposes includes land held in the Community Redevelopment Property Trust Fund and land that has been designated in the long-range property management plan, either for sale or for future development, as specified. The bill would also broaden the definition of "exempt surplus land" to include specified types of lands. (2) Existing law requires a local agency disposing of surplus land to send, prior to disposing of that property, a written offer to sell or lease the property to specified entities. Existing law requires that a local agency, upon a written request, send a written offer to sell or lease surplus land to a housing sponsor, as defined, for the purpose of developing low- and moderate-income housing. Existing law also requires the local agency to send a written offer to sell or lease surplus land for the purpose of developing property located within an infill opportunity zone, designated as provided, to, among others, a community redevelopment agency. This bill would instead require, except as provided, the local agency disposing of surplus land to send, prior to disposing of that property or participating in negotiations to dispose of that property with a prospective transferee, a written notice of availability. The bill would make various related conforming changes. With regards to a housing sponsor, the bill would require that a notice of availability be sent if the housing sponsor has notified the Department of Housing and Community Development of its interest in the land, rather than upon written request. With regards to surplus land to be used for the purpose of developing property located within an infill opportunity zone, as described above, the bill would instead require that the written notice of availability be sent to a successor agency to a former redevelopment agency. The bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to maintain an up-to-date listing of all notices of availability throughout the state on its internet website. (3) After the disposing agency has received a notice from an entity desiring to purchase or lease the land, existing law requires the disposing agency to enter into good faith negotiations to determine a mutually satisfactory sales price or lease terms. This bill would prohibit the terms agreed to pursuant to these negotiations from doing certain things, including, among other things, disallowing residential use of the site as a condition of the sale or lease. (4) Existing law requires a local agency to give priority to the development of affordable housing for lower income elderly or disabled persons or households, and other lower income households when disposing of surplus land. This bill would remove that priority. (5) If the local agency receives offers from more than one entity that agrees to meet specified requirements related to the provision of affordable housing on the surplus land, existing law requires the local agency to give priority to the entity that proposes to provide the greatest number of units that meet those requirements. Notwithstanding that requirement, existing law requires the local agency to give first priority to an entity in specified circumstances. In the event that more than one entity proposes the same number of units that meet the above-described affordable housing requirements, this bill would require that priority be given to the entity that proposes the deepest average level of affordability for the affordable units. The bill would authorize a local agency to negotiate concurrently with all entities that provide notice of interest to purchase or lease land for the purpose of developing affordable housing. (6) Under existing law, failure by a local agency to comply with these requirements for the disposal of surplus land does not invalidate the transfer or conveyance of real property to a purchaser or encumbrancer for value. This bill would require a local agency, prior to agreeing to terms for the disposition of surplus land, to provide the Department of Housing and Community Development with a specified description of the process followed to dispose of the land and a copy of any recorded restrictions against the property, as specified, in a form prescribed by the Department of Housing and Community Development. The bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to, among other things, review the description and submit written findings to the local agency within 30 days of receiving the description if the proposed disposal of the land will violate specified provisions of law. The bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide the local agency a reasonable time, as specified, to respond to the department's findings prior to taking certain actions and would require the local agency to take specified actions in response. This bill would, with certain exceptions, impose a penalty of 30% of the final sale price of the land upon a local agency that disposes of land in violation of specified provisions of law after receiving the notification from the Department of Housing and Community Development to that effect, and a 50% penalty for subsequent violations. The bill would authorize specified entities or persons to bring an action against a local agency to enforce these provisions and would allow a local agency 60 days to cure or correct an alleged violation before the action may be brought, except as specified. The bill would require a penalty assessed pursuant to these provisions to be deposited into a local housing trust fund or, in certain circumstances, the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund or the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund, as provided. The bill would make the expenditure of penalty moneys deposited into the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund or the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Fund pursuant to these provisions subject to appropriation by the Legislature. This bill would require the department to implement these provisions commencing on January 1, 2021. (7) If a local agency does not agree to price and terms with an entity to which notice and an opportunity to purchase or lease are given and disposes of the surplus land to an entity that uses the property for the development of 10 or more residential units, existing law requires the purchasing entity or a successor in interest to provide not less than 15% of the total number of units developed on the parcels at an affordable housing cost or affordable rent to lower income households. This bill would revise this requirement to apply if the local agency does not agree to price and terms with an entity to which notice of availability of land was given, or if no entity to which a notice of availability was given responds to that notice, and 10 or more residential units are developed on the property. This bill, if a local agency that is a district, except as specified, disposes of surplus land where local zoning permits development of 10 or more residential units or is rezoned within 5 years of the disposal to permit the development of 10 or more residential units, and 10 or more residential units are developed on the property, would require not less than 15% of the total number of residential units developed on the parcel to be sold or rented at affordable housing cost or affordable rent to lower income households. (8) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, 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, among other entities, the Department of Housing and Community Development that includes, among other specified information, the number of net new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy thus far in the housing element cycle, as provided. This bill would require a city or county to include as a part of that report a listing of specified sites owned by the city or county that have been sold, leased, or otherwise disposed of in the prior year. The Planning and Zoning Law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable for residential development to be used to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need determined pursuant to specified law. This bill would require the housing element to provide a description of nonvacant sites owned by the city or county and provide whether there are any plans to dispose of the property during the planning period and how the city or county will comply with specified provisions relating to the disposal of surplus land by a local agency. (9) Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city or county and authorize notice to the Attorney General when a city or county has taken an action that violates the Housing Accountability Act, specified provisions relating to local housing elements, and the Density Bonus Law. This bill would also require the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify the city or county and authorizes notice to the Attorney General when the city or county has taken an action that violates these provisions relating to surplus property. (10) Existing law makes various findings and declarations as to the need for affordable housing and the use of surplus government land for that purpose. This bill would revise these findings. (11) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65583.2 of the Government Code proposed by AB 957 to be operative only if this bill and AB 957 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to the disposal of surplus land, and expanding the scope of local agencies subject to the bill's requirements, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law, the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act of 2016, as enacted by Proposition 57 at the November 8, 2016, statewide general election, authorizes the district attorney, among other things, to make a motion to transfer a minor from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction in a case in which a minor is alleged to have committed a felony when the person was 16 years of age or older. Following a fitness hearing, existing law requires the juvenile court to decide whether the minor should be transferred to a court of criminal jurisdiction and recite the basis for its decision. This bill would authorize a person whose case was transferred from juvenile court to a court of criminal jurisdiction to file a motion to return the case to juvenile court for disposition under specified circumstances, including, among others, when the person is convicted at trial only of an offense that was not the basis for transfer from juvenile court to the criminal court, as specified. Upon return to the juvenile court, the bill would require the probation department to prepare a social study on the questions of proper disposition, and would impose additional duties on the clerk of the court with respect to notice and court records, as specified. By imposing new duties on probation departments, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law imposes an additional 3-year sentence for each prior separate prison term served by a defendant where the prior and current offense was a violent felony, as defined. For other felonies, existing law imposes an additional one-year term for each prior separate prison term or county jail felony term, except under specified circumstances. This bill would instead impose that additional one-year term served for each prior separate prison term served for a conviction of a sexually violent offense, as defined.

Existing law specifies that a hiring of residential real property, for a term not specified by the parties, is deemed to be renewed at the end of the term implied by law unless one of the parties gives written notice to the other of that party's intention to terminate. Existing law requires an owner of a residential dwelling to give notice at least 60 days prior to the proposed date of termination, or at least 30 days prior to the proposed date of termination if any tenant or resident has resided in the dwelling for less than one year, as specified. Existing law requires any notice given by an owner to be given in a prescribed manner, to contain certain information, and to be formatted, as specified. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an owner, as defined, of residential real property from terminating a tenancy without just cause, as defined, which the bill would require to be stated in the written notice to terminate tenancy when the tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real property for 12 months, except as provided. The bill would require, for certain just cause terminations that are curable, that the owner give a notice of violation and an opportunity to cure the violation prior to issuing the notice of termination. The bill, if the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, would authorize a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure to be served to terminate the tenancy. The bill would require, for no-fault just cause terminations, as specified, that the owner, at the owner's option, either assist certain tenants to relocate, regardless of the tenant's income, by providing a direct payment of one month's rent to the tenant, as specified, or waive in writing the payment of rent for the final month of the tenancy, prior to the rent becoming due. The bill would require the actual amount of relocation assistance or rent waiver provided to a tenant that fails to vacate after the expiration of the notice to terminate the tenancy to be recoverable as damages in an action to recover possession. The bill would provide that if the owner does not provide relocation assistance, the notice of termination is void. The bill would except certain properties and circumstances from the application of its provisions. The bill would require an owner of residential property to provide prescribed notice to a tenant of the tenant's rights under these provisions. The bill would not apply to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted on or before September 1, 2019, or to residential real property subject to a local ordinance requiring just cause for termination adopted or amended after September 1, 2019, that is more protective than these provisions, as defined. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2030. 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, until January 1, 2030, prohibit an owner of residential real property from, over the course of any 12-month period, increasing the gross rental rate for a dwelling or unit more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, as defined, or 10%, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for the immediately preceding 12 months, subject to specified conditions. The bill would prohibit an owner of a unit of residential real property from increasing the gross rental rate for the unit in more than 2 increments over a 12-month period, after the tenant remains in occupancy of the unit over a 12-month period. The bill would exempt certain properties from these provisions. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to submit a report, on or before January 1, 2030, to the Legislature regarding the effectiveness of these provisions. The bill would provide that these provisions apply to all rent increases occurring on or after March 15, 2019. The bill would provide that in the event that an owner increased the rent by more than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, the applicable rent on January 1, 2020, shall be the rent as of March 15, 2019, plus the maximum permissible increase, and the owner shall not be liable to the tenant for any corresponding rent overpayment. The bill would authorize an owner who increased the rent by less than the amount specified above between March 15, 2019, and January 1, 2020, to increase the rent twice within 12 months of March 15, 2019, but not by more than the amount specified above. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the owner of an assisted housing development in which there will be an expiration of rental restrictions to, among other things, provide notice of the proposed change to each affected tenant household residing in the assisted housing development subject to specified procedures and requirements, and to also provide specified entities notice and an opportunity to submit an offer to purchase the development prior to the expiration of the rental restrictions. This bill would authorize an owner of an assisted housing development, who demonstrates, under penalty of perjury, compliance with the provisions described above with regard to the expiration of rental restrictions, to establish the initial unassisted rental rate for units without regard to the cap on rent increases discussed above, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases in the development. The bill would authorize an owner of a deed-restricted affordable housing unit or an affordable housing unit subject to a regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency limiting rental rates that is not within an assisted housing development to establish the initial rental rate for the unit upon the expiration of the restriction, but would require the owner to comply with the above cap on rent increases for subsequent rent increases for the unit. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2030. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. By requiring an owner of an assisted housing development to demonstrate compliance with specified provisions under penalty of perjury, this bill would expand the existing crime of perjury and thus 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 provides for the establishment of various special districts that may support and finance housing development, including affordable housing special beneficiary districts that are authorized to promote affordable housing development with certain property tax revenues that a city or county would otherwise be entitled to receive. This bill, the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Housing Finance Act, would establish the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (hereafter the authority) and would state that the authority's purpose is to raise, administer, and allocate funding for affordable housing in the San Francisco Bay area, as defined, and provide technical assistance at a regional level for tenant protection, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production. The bill would provide that the governing board of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission serve as the governing board of the authority. The bill would require the authority board to provide for regular audits of the authority, including an independent financial and performance audit for bonds secured by ad valorem property taxes, and financial reports, as provided. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities within the San Francisco Bay area, including charter cities. The bill would authorize the authority to, among other things, raise and allocate new revenue, incur and issue bonds and other indebtedness, and allocate funds to the various cities, counties, and other public agencies and affordable housing projects within its jurisdiction to finance affordable housing development projects, preserve and enhance existing affordable housing, and fund tenant protection programs, as specified, in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements. In this regard, the bill would authorize the entity to impose various special taxes, including a parcel tax, and certain business taxes, within its jurisdiction and to issue general obligation bonds secured by the levy of ad valorem property taxes, in accordance with applicable constitutional requirements, and revenue bonds payable from the revenues of the authority, other than revenues generated from ad valorem property taxes. The bill would also authorize the executive board of the Association of Bay Area Governments to impose a commercial linkage fee, as defined, in an amount not to exceed the equivalent of $10, and require a city or county in the San Francisco Bay area that has jurisdiction over the approval of a commercial development project, as defined, to collect that fee as a condition of that approval and remit the amount of fee to the authority, as provided. The bill would require the authority to ratify the commercial linkage fee adopted by the executive board of the Association of Bay Area Governments. The bill would require that revenue generated by the authority pursuant to these provisions be used for specified housing purposes and require the authority to distribute those funds in accordance with specified requirements, including the adoption of a regional expenditure plan. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the San Francisco Bay area. By adding to the duties of local officials with respect to (1) providing staff for the authority and (2) elections procedures for revenue measures on behalf of the authority, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law, the Uniform Commercial Code—Sales, generally regulates transactions in goods, as defined. Existing law also generally prescribes obligations arising from particular transactions. This bill would require a marketplace, as defined, to ensure that their terms and conditions regarding commercial relationships with marketplace sellers meet specified requirements, including that the terms and conditions are drafted in plain and intelligible language. The bill would define "marketplace seller" for these purposes as a person residing in the state who has an agreement with a marketplace and makes retail sales of services or tangible personal property through a marketplace owned, operated, or controlled by that marketplace. If a marketplace decides to suspend or terminate a marketplace seller based upon an alleged violation of law or a term, condition, or policy of the marketplace, the bill would require the marketplace to provide the marketplace seller with a written statement of reasons for that decision, as specified. This bill would state that its provisions are severable.

Existing law allows individuals charged with a specified crime to qualify for a pretrial diversion program based upon various circumstances and qualifications, including mental health disorders, military service, or drug addiction. Existing law generally requires, if the defendant performs satisfactorily in one of these diversion programs, that the court dismiss the defendant's criminal charges and seal the record of arrest, as specified. This bill would authorize the presiding judge of the superior court, in consultation with the presiding juvenile court judge and criminal court judges and together with the prosecuting entity and the public defender, to create a pretrial diversion program for defendants who are primary caregivers of a child under 18 years of age, as specified, who are charged with a misdemeanor or a nonserious, nonviolent felony, and who are not being placed into diversion for a crime alleged to have been committed against a person for whom the defendant is the primary caregiver. The bill would set the period of diversion at not less than 6 months, but not more than 24 months. The bill would require the defendant to participate in classes relating to subjects that may include parenting, anger management, and financial literacy, and to receive services relating to housing, employment, and drug, alcohol, and mental health treatment, among others.

Existing law provides for the compensation of victims and derivative victims of specified types of crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board from the Restitution Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, for specified losses suffered as a result of those crimes. Existing law requires an application for compensation to be filed within 3 years of the date of the crime, 3 years after the victim attains 21 years of age, or 3 years from the discovery that an injury or death had been sustained as a direct result of the crime, whichever is later. This bill would extend the time to file an application for compensation from 3 years to 7 years under each of these circumstances. The bill would also make a conforming change and delete an obsolete provision. By extending the application timeframes authorizing certain uses of continuously appropriated funds, the bill would make an appropriation.

Existing law requires the airport manager of an airport operated by a city, county, city and county, or airport district that conducts commercial operations and that has more than one million enplanements a year, or upon new terminal construction or the replacement, expansion, or renovation of an existing terminal, to provide a room or other location at each airport terminal behind the airport security screening area for members of the public to express breast milk in private. Existing law imposes various requirements on transit operators and on buildings open to the public. This bill would require specific multimodal transit stations, and multimodal transit stations that meet certain criteria, that begin construction or a renovation on or after January 1, 2021, to include a lactation room. To the extent the bill imposes additional duties on a local agency, 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.