Existing law specifies certain rights and limitations for landlords and tenants subject to eviction and certain procedures for civil actions involving evictions. Existing law, the State Bar Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation, governed by a board of trustees. Existing law requires an attorney to maintain short-term deposits of client funds in an Interest On Lawyers' Trust Account (IOLTA) , and requires the interest and dividends earned on the account to be paid to the State Bar for the funding of certain programs that provide civil legal services without charge to indigent persons. Existing law requires the board of trustees to adopt regulations and procedures necessary to implement provisions, referred to as the Legal Services Trust Fund Program, that govern the funding of those programs. Existing administrative law establishes a Legal Services Trust Fund Commission to administer revenue from IOLTA and other funds remitted to the Legal Services Trust Fund Program. This bill would establish the Stable Communities Fund within the Legal Services Trust Fund Program, to be funded upon appropriation by the Legislature, and would require the State Bar, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to distribute moneys in the fund in the form of grants awarded on a competitive basis to certain nonprofit organizations, local governments, or local governmental agencies to provide specified education, outreach, and legal services related to eviction prevention, as specified. The bill would also require that short-term rental assistance be funded, upon appropriation by the Legislature, from the General Fund. The bill would require the State Bar to award the grants according to various criteria, including, among others, prohibiting an applicant from receiving funding from the Stable Communities Fund solely to provide rental assistance and requiring services to be provided at no cost to recipients. The bill would require a grantee to report annually to the State Bar on certain activities, services, and assistance funded by the grant, and would prohibit a grantee from using more than 10% of the allocation received from the Stable Communities Fund for administrative costs.
Sponsored bills
(1) 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 (EIR) 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 exempts from its requirements certain residential, employment center, and mixed-use development projects meeting specified criteria, including that the project is located in a transit priority area and that the project is undertaken and is consistent with a specific plan for which an environmental impact report has been certified. This bill would additionally exempt those projects located in a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. The bill would require that the project is undertaken and is consistent with either a specific plan prepared pursuant to specific provisions of law or a community plan, as defined, for which an EIR has been certified within the preceding 15 years in order to be exempt. The bill would additionally require the project site to have been previously developed or to be a vacant site meeting certain requirements. Because a lead agency would be required to determine the applicability of this exemption, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) CEQA exempts from its requirements agricultural employee housing projects, affordable housing projects, and housing projects on infill sites that meet certain requirements, including, among others, the site is not located within the boundaries of a state conservancy. CEQA prohibits those exempt projects from being located in certain areas. This bill would allow the location of agricultural employee housing projects, affordable housing projects, and housing projects on infill sites to be located within the boundaries of a state conservancy in order to be exempt. The bill would revise and recast the areas in which those exempt projects cannot be located, as provided. (3) CEQA exempts from its requirements residential projects on infill sites that meet certain requirements, including, among others, that the location of the residential project on an infill site is no more than 4 acres and that the project is located within 12 mile of a major transit stop. This bill instead would require that the location of a residential project on an infill site be no more than 5 acres. The bill would additionally exempt those residential projects located in a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. (4) CEQA exempts from its requirements a transit priority project meeting certain requirements and that is declared by a legislative body to be a sustainable communities project. CEQA prohibits a transit priority project declared to be a sustainable communities project from being located in certain areas and requires the project to be within 12 mile of a rail transit station or a ferry terminal included in a regional transportation plan or within 14 mile of a high-quality transit corridor included in a regional transportation plan. This bill would revise and recast the areas in which the transit priority project declared to be a sustainable communities project cannot be located, as provided. The bill would additionally authorize the transit priority project declared to be a sustainable community project if the project is located within a very low vehicle travel area, as defined. The bill would additionally require the site for the transit priority project to have been previously developed or to be a vacant lot meeting certain requirements. (5) This bill would require a lead agency approving a project that is exempt from CEQA under the provisions described in paragraphs (1) , (3) , and (4) above to file with the Office of Planning and Research a notice of exemption. By imposing additional duties on the lead agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (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 requires the State Department of Public Health to award and administer, on a competitive basis, grants for projects directed at the prevention of tobacco-related diseases. Existing law requires a local lead agency, as defined, to implement specified health education against tobacco use. Existing law requires the State Department of Education to provide leadership for the successful implementation of tobacco use prevention programs administered by local public and private schools, school districts, and county offices of education. Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to conduct statewide surveillance of tobacco-related behaviors, knowledge, and attitudes, evaluate local and state tobacco control programs, evaluate the effectiveness of specified tobacco use prevention education directed at schools, and implement a tobacco use prevention media campaign, as specified. This bill would require the State Department of Public Health to conduct a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Provider Awareness Campaign to increase awareness of COPD, as specified, and to target the COPD Provider Awareness Campaign to, among others, primary care providers and family care providers. The bill would make related findings and declarations.
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 defines various terms for purposes of these provisions, including "crime," which includes any public offense wherever it may take place that would constitute a misdemeanor or felony. This bill would revise the definition of "crime" to include any public offense described above regardless of whether any suspect is arrested for or charged with the commission of the crime. The bill would also include in the definition of "crime" the use of force by a peace officer that is beyond what is reasonable under the totality of the circumstances, and that causes the victim injury or death, regardless of whether the peace officer is arrested for or charged with the commission of a crime or a public offense. By expanding the types of crime for which compensation can be paid from a continuously appropriated fund, the bill would make an appropriation. Existing law specifies that a person is not eligible for compensation under specified conditions, including, among other things, if the board determines that denial of the claim for compensation is appropriate because of the nature of the victim's involvement in the events leading to the crime, or the involvement of the person whose injury or death gives rise to the application. If the victim is determined to have been involved in the events leading to the qualifying crime, existing law specifies the factors that the board may consider to mitigate that involvement including, among other things, that the victim's injuries were significantly more serious than reasonably could have been expected based on the victim's level of involvement, or that a third party interfered in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable by the victim. This bill would recast the factors that may be considered in determining whether the victim was involved in the events leading to the qualifying crime. The bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit the board from denying an application based upon the victim's involvement in the crime if the claim is for injury or death that happened as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer. Existing law requires the board to deny an application if it finds that the victim failed to cooperate reasonably with a law enforcement agency in the apprehension and conviction of a criminal committing the crime. This bill would prohibit the board from determining that a victim failed to cooperate with law enforcement based upon their conduct with law enforcement at the scene of the crime or on a hospital following the crime, and specify that lack of cooperation shall not be found solely because a victim delayed in reporting the qualifying crime. The bill would, notwithstanding those provisions, prohibit the board from denying an application based solely upon the victim's failure to cooperate if the claim is for injury or death that happened as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer. The bill would prohibit the board from denying an application for a claim based on injuries or death as a result of the use of excessive force by a peace officer based solely on a police report, or the lack thereof, or based upon whether the peace officer was arrested or charged with a crime. The bill would, absent a police report, authorize these claims to be supported by other evidence. The bill would also prohibit the board from denying an application, in whole or in part, based solely upon the contents of a police report, or because a police report was not made by the victim, or based upon whether any suspect was arrested or charged with the qualifying crime. The bill would require the board to consider other evidence to establish that a qualifying crime occurred. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law provides that a tenant is guilty of unlawful detainer if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord after the tenant defaults on rent or fails to perform a condition or covenant of the lease under which the property is held, among other reasons. Existing law requires a tenant be served a 3 days' notice in writing to cure a default or perform a condition of the lease, or return possession of the property to the landlord, as specified. Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prohibits a tenancy from being terminated unless specified conditions are met, including that the tenant fails to pay rent, utility charges, or reasonable incidental service charges and 3 days' notice in writing is provided to the tenant, as specified. This bill would enact the COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act of 2020. This bill would require that any 3 days' notice that demands payment of COVID-19 rental debt that is served on a tenant during the covered time period meet specified criteria, including that the notice include an unsigned copy of an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress and that the notice advise the tenant that the tenant will not be evicted for failure to comply with the notice if the tenant delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress to the landlord, as specified. The bill would define "covered time period" for purposes of these provisions as the time between March 4, 2020, and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs earlier. The bill would provide that a tenant is not guilty of an unlawful detainer if the tenant makes the demanded payment, vacates the property, or delivers a signed attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress within 15 days of the service of the notice. The bill would deem a 3 days' notice that fails to comply with this criteria void and insufficient to support a judgment for unlawful detainer or to terminate a tenancy under the Mobilehome Residency Law. The bill would prohibit a tenant that delivers an attestation of COVID-19-related financial distress pursuant to these provisions from being deemed in default with regard to the COVID-19 rental debt. Existing law regulates specified terms and conditions of tenancies. Existing law authorizes a landlord to demand security at the beginning of a tenancy for residential property and specifies the purposes for which the security may be used, including, among others, compensating the landlord for the tenant's default in payment of rent. The bill would prohibit a landlord from applying a security deposit to satisfy COVID-19 rental debt or applying a monthly rental payment to any COVID-19 rental debt, unless the tenant agrees in writing. The bill would define "COVID-19 rental debt" as unpaid rent or any other unpaid financial obligation under the tenancy that accrued during the covered time period. The bill would prohibit a landlord from charging a tenant, or attempting to collect from a tenant, fees for a late payment of COVID-19 rental debt. The bill would prohibit a landlord from terminating a tenancy or threatening to terminate a tenancy, in retaliation against a tenant for having COVID-19 rental debt. This bill would prohibit a housing provider, credit reporting agency, tenant screening company, or other specified entities from using an alleged COVID-19 rental debt as a negative factor in evaluating creditworthiness, as specified. The bill would prohibit a cause of action to recover COVID-19 rental debt until 15 months after the date the COVID-19 state of emergency terminates or April 1, 2022, whichever is earlier. This bill would provide that any provision of a stipulation settlement agreement, or other agreement that conflicts with or purports to waive these provisions is prohibited and void as contrary to public policy. The bill would provide that if a local initiative, ordinance, regulation, or other policy conflicts with these provisions, the provision that provides the greater protection to tenants controls. (2) Existing law prescribes various requirements to be satisfied before the exercise of a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust. In this regard, existing law requires that a notice of default and a notice of sale be recorded and that specified periods of time elapse between the recording and the sale. Existing law establishes certain requirements in connection with foreclosures on mortgages and deeds of trust, including restrictions on the actions mortgage servicers may take while a borrower is attempting to secure a loan modification or has submitted a loan modification application. This bill would enact the Small Landlord and Homeowner Relief Act of 2020. The bill would authorize a borrower to request forbearance during the effective time period from any mortgage obligation by submitting a request to the borrower's mortgage servicer, either orally or in writing, affirming that the borrower is experiencing a financial hardship that prevents the borrower from making timely payments on the mortgage obligation due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "borrower" for these purposes as a natural person who is a mortgagor, trustor, or confirmed successor in interest; an entity other than a natural person provided that the secured property is currently occupied by one or more residential tenants; or a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on a security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract that gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome, except as specified. The bill would define "effective time period" as the time period between the operational date of these provisions and either 90 days after the termination of the COVID-19 state of emergency or April 1, 2021, whichever occurs first. This bill would also authorize a mobilehome owner who is the borrower on any security agreement relating to a loan or conditional sale contract which, according to its terms, gives the secured party the right to foreclose its security interest in a manufactured home or mobilehome to request forbearance during the effective time period, as specified. This bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to, if certain requirements are met, offer the forbearance requested for an initial period of up to 180 days, which may be extended at the request of the borrower or mobilehome borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer or lienholder to limit the total forbearance provided to 360 days and authorize the mortgage servicer or lienholder to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 360 days. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer or lienholder from assessing, accruing, or applying any fees, penalties, or additional interest during the forbearance period, as specified. The bill would require a mortgage servicer or lienholder to attempt to contact the borrower, including a mobilehome borrower, with diligent effort at least 30 days before the end of any forbearance period granted pursuant to these provisions to inquire whether the borrower is able to resume making preforbearance mortgage or loan payments. The bill would, if the borrower indicates that they will not be able to resume preforbearance payments, require the mortgage servicer or lien holder to evaluate the borrower for loss mitigation and foreclosure prevention, as specified. Alternatively, if the borrower affirms they are able to resume preforbearance payments or fails to respond to the mortgage servicer, the bill would require the mortgage servicer or lienholder to reinstate the preforbearance payments and provide a specified notice to the borrower that includes, among other things, a description of any options available to the borrower to address the amount unpaid during the forbearance. This bill would authorize a multifamily borrower that was current on its payments as of February 1, 2020, to submit a written request for forbearance to the mortgage servicer affirming that the multifamily borrower is experiencing a financial hardship during the COVID-19 emergency. The bill would define "multifamily borrower" for purposes of these provisions as a borrower of a residential mortgage loan that is secured by a lien against a property comprising 5 or more dwelling units. The bill would require a mortgage servicer to provide an initial forbearance period of 30 days and grant additional 30-day extension periods upon the request of the borrower, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to limit the total forbearance provided to 180 days and authorize the mortgage servicer to count any forbearance already provided to the borrower between March 4, 2020, and the date of the mobilehome borrower's initial request against that 180 days. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition forbearance on the receipt of reasonable documentation from the borrower that demonstrates a decrease of at least 10% or more of the multifamily borrower's gross rental revenue, as specified. The bill would authorize a mortgage servicer to condition any extension of the forbearance period on the receipt of payment equal to the net operating income derived from the property and the borrower keeping all property tax and insurance payments current. This bill would authorize a borrower, including a mobilehome borrower and multifamily borrower, who is likely to suffer material harm from a violation of these provisions to bring an action to obtain injunctive relief, damages, and restitution, as specified. The bill would require a court to award a prevailing borrower reasonable attorney's fees and costs in any action based on a violation of these provisions. This bill would provide that any waiver by a borrower of these provisions is contrary to public policy and void.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act establishes a system of childcare and development services for children up to 13 years of age. Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to implement a plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates, which vary with the length of the program year and the hours of service. Existing law requires the reimbursement system to be submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee. This bill would require the Superintendent to implement a reimbursement system plan that establishes reasonable standards and assigned reimbursement rates that would vary with additional factors, including a quality adjustment factor to address the cost of staffing ratios, as provided. The bill would require the reimbursement system plan, including methodology, standards, county rate targets as provided, and the total statewide funding amount necessary to reach annual rate targets for all agencies to be annually submitted to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, on or before November 10. The bill would require the plan to include a formula for annually adjusting reimbursement rates, as provided. The bill would require the department, by July 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, as provided, to establish a reimbursement rate target for each contracting agency that meets specific quality standards based on specified elements, including quality adjustment factors for the age range of children proposed to be served by the contracting agency, as a multiplier, which the bill would also require the department to establish. (2) Existing law establishes adjustment factors for a provider agency's reported child days of enrollment in order to reflect the additional expense of serving specified children, including an adjustment factor for infants and toddlers who are 0 to 36 months and are served in a child daycare center or family childcare home, as provided. This bill would, as of July 1, 2020, delete the above adjustment factors and would make conforming changes. (3) Existing law requires reimbursement rates to be adjusted by specified adjustment factors for childcare and development programs and, for childcare and development providers serving children for less than 4 hours per day, requires the reimbursement factor to be 55% of the standard reimbursement rate. This bill would instead require the above-described reimbursement factor to be 50% of the standard reimbursement rate. (4) The bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of SB 174 of the 2019–20 Regular Session on or before January 1, 2020.
Existing law establishes in state government the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, comprised of the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Department of Business Oversight, the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board, the California Horse Racing Board, and the Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission. Existing law requires the Governor to create the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council (referred to as "the coordinating council") and to appoint up to 19 members of that council, as provided. Existing law specifies the duties of the coordinating council, including creating partnerships among state agencies and departments, local government agencies, and specified federal agencies and private entities, for the purpose of arriving at specific strategies to end homelessness. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature or upon receiving technical assistance offered by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) , if available, would require the coordinating council to conduct, or contract with an entity to conduct, a statewide needs and gaps analysis to, among other things, identify state programs that provide housing or services to persons experiencing homelessness and create a financial model that will assess certain investment needs for the purpose of moving persons experiencing homelessness into permanent housing. The bill would provide that the council's obligation to conduct the statewide needs and gaps analysis is fulfilled if a technical assistance provider from HUD conducts the analysis on behalf of the council. The bill would require the council to work with the technical assistance provider to complete the analysis. The bill would authorize local governments to collaborate with the coordinating council or other entity conducting the analysis upon an appropriation by the Legislature to cover costs of the collaboration or upon provision of technical assistance by HUD. The bill would also require the coordinating council or any other entity conducting the analysis to seek input from the coordinating council's members on the direction of, design of data collection for, and items to be included in the statewide needs and gaps analysis. The bill would require the council to report on the analysis to specified committees in the Legislature by July 31, 2021. The bill would require the coordinating council or other entity conducting the analysis to evaluate all available data, including, among other things, data from other state departments and agencies. The bill would require a state department or agency with a member on the coordinating council to assist in data collection for the analysis by responding to data requests within 180 days, as specified. This bill would require the Department of Housing and Community Development (department) to set a benchmark goal in reducing homelessness by January 1, 2028, for the state pursuant to the statewide needs and gaps analysis. The bill would require the department to approve or work with local agencies, as defined, to identify, as provided, appropriate benchmark goals to reduce homelessness for each local agency and cities within each local agency. The bill would also require the department to set annual benchmarks to meet these benchmark goals. The bill, on or before January 1, 2022, would require each local agency to submit to the department an actionable county-level plan for meeting specific annual benchmarks, with the goal of achieving the state-identified benchmark goal. The bill would require each city in the local agency's jurisdiction to participate in the plan, and each local agency would be required to request and actively seek the participation of all homeless continuums of care that serve the local agency's jurisdiction. The bill would require the plan to include, among other things, a description and the amount of all funding sources the local agency, and any incorporated jurisdiction and continuum of care, has earmarked or committed to addressing homelessness, mental illness, and substance abuse within its jurisdiction. The bill would require the state and each local agency to submit an annual progress report to the department that details the progress and implementation of the adopted plan and any amendments proposed to the plan. This bill would require the department to review submitted plans and provide feedback and recommended revisions. The bill would require the state or a local agency to either adopt those recommended revisions, or adopt findings as to why the recommended revisions are not needed. The bill would require the department to monitor the implementation and progress of state and local agency plans. The bill would require the department to notify the state or the local agency and the inspector general if the agency fails, within a reasonable time, to make progress in accordance with their plan. The bill would provide that an innovative project to test new programs, as described, shall be deemed approved by the department if the department approves a plan or plan amendment with the innovative project and the local agency or city establishes and documents outcomes upon implementation of the project. This bill would establish an independent state officer, named the Housing and Homelessness Inspector General, within the department. The bill would require the Governor to appoint the Housing and Homelessness Inspector General, subject to confirmation by the Senate. The bill would, on and after January 1, 2022, authorize the inspector general to bring an action against the state, a local agency, or a city that fails to adopt a plan or fails, within a reasonable time, to make progress in accordance with their adopted plan. The bill, if the court finds that the state or applicable local agency or city has not substantially complied, would authorize the Housing and Homelessness Inspector General to request the court to issue an order or judgment directing the state, local agency, or city to substantially comply, as provided. The bill would authorize the inspector general to impose a civil penalty on the state, a local agency, or a city that is found to have deliberately and intentionally transported a homeless individual to a different jurisdiction in order to reduce the number of homeless individuals within their jurisdiction, as specified. By requiring local agencies to submit a county-level plan for meeting specific annual benchmarks relating to homelessness and to develop and implement a homelessness plan to achieve the benchmark goal developed by the department, 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.
(1) The Child Care and Development Services Act, administered by the State Department of Education, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to administer childcare and development programs that offer a full range of services to eligible children from infancy to 13 years of age, inclusive. The act requires that families meet specified requirements to be eligible for federal- and state-subsidized childcare and development services. This bill would extend eligibility to a family in which a member of that family has been certified as fully eligible to receive CalFresh or Medi-Cal benefits. The bill would require a parent to provide documentation of current enrollment in CalFresh or Medi-Cal, unless the contractor providing childcare and development services has, and elects to use, other means of obtaining verification of that enrollment. The bill would authorize a family to submit a self-certification of income that is signed by the parent for the purpose of prioritizing enrollment and calculating family fees. (2) Existing law requires the department to arrange intraagency adjustments between California state preschool contracts and general childcare contracts for the same agency and funding allocation, and to establish timelines for intraagency contract fund transfers. This bill would additionally require the department to allow and arrange for interagency adjustments between those contracts for the same agency or different agencies and the same funding allocation, and to establish timelines for those interagency contract fund transfers. (3) Existing law requires the Superintendent to implement a plan establishing assigned reimbursement rates, per unit of average daily enrollment, to be paid by the state to provider agencies for the provision of childcare and development services. Existing law provides for an adjustment factor to be applied to units of average daily enrollment if a provider agency serves children who meet specified criteria. Existing law sets the adjustment factor based on the age of the child served, among other criteria. This bill would require those adjustment factors to continue to apply irrespective of whether a child is served in a commingled classroom that serves children from 0 to 12 years of age. The bill, during the 2020–21 fiscal year, would authorize a contractor providing childcare and development services under the act to provide those services to children from 0 to 12 years of age in classrooms with children of varying ages. (4) Existing law requires the Superintendent to establish a fee schedule for families using preschool and childcare and development services, as specified, and requires family fees to be assessed at initial enrollment and reassessed at the update of certification or recertification. Existing law encourages child development contractors to develop and maintain a reserve within the child development fund in the county treasury, derived from earned but unexpended funds. Existing law authorizes reserve funds to be expended for specified purposes. Existing law requires that 10% of specified reserve funds to be used solely for the purpose of professional development for California state preschool program instructional staff. This bill would authorize a contractor to waive family fees for families who are enrolled but who receive services only through distance learning. The bill would provide that the cost of waiving family fees under the above-described provision is an allowable use of contract funds received for providing childcare and development services, and would authorize a contractor to use reserve funds to cover the costs of a waiver. The bill would also delete the requirement that 10% of the specified reserve funds be used for that professional development purpose.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each city, county, and city and county to prepare and adopt a general plan that contains certain mandatory elements, including a housing element. Existing law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development, in consultation with each council of governments, to determine the existing and projected need for housing in each region and further requires the appropriate council of governments, or the department for cities and counties without a council of governments, to adopt a final regional housing need plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county, as provided. This bill would authorize a city or county to include in its inventory of land suitable for residential development specified sites that contain an existing single-family dwelling unit, but that the city or county has permitted, or is proposing to permit, to contain 4 dwelling units as a use by right. The bill would require these sites to be identified to satisfy either the moderate- or the above moderate-income regional housing need income level. The bill would require a city or county identifying a site pursuant to these provisions to include in its housing element a description of the development standards that enable the identified sites to be redeveloped at a higher density, as specified, and a description of the policies, programs, and incentives that will be used to facilitate the development. The bill would also require the city or county that proposes to permit a site that contains an existing single-family dwelling unit to contain 4 dwelling units pursuant to these provisions to do so in accordance with specified timeframes. If SB 1120 of the 2019–20 Regular Session is enacted, the bill would prohibit the zoning capacity permitted by a provision of SB 1120 from being considered as enabling a development of 4 dwelling units. The bill would authorize a city or county, instead of listing sites individually in its inventory of land suitable for residential development, to include a summary of the credits received if the housing element includes a separate list of the sites that includes specified information. This bill would require the department to provide a credit of one unit toward the city or county's share of the regional housing need allocation for every 10 sites identified under these provisions, as specified. The bill would prohibit the cumulative credit received by a city or county under these provisions from exceeding either 50% of the units needed to meet its regional housing needs allocation for moderate income or 10% of the units needed to meet its regional housing needs allocation for above moderate income. Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, governs the management and operation of common interest developments. Existing law prohibits the governing document of a common interest development from prohibiting or unreasonably restricting the construction or use of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for single-family residential use, as specified. This bill would make void and unenforceable any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, contract, security instrument, or other instrument affecting the transfer or sale of any interest in a planned development, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction or use of up to 4 primary dwelling units on a lot zoned for at least 4 dwelling units, as specified.
Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, prescribes various terms and conditions of tenancies in mobilehome parks. Existing law defines "tenancy" for these purposes as the right of a homeowner to use a site within a mobilehome park on which to locate, maintain, and occupy a mobilehome for human habitation, including the use of the services and facilities of the park. Existing law, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, prohibits, with certain exceptions, an owner of residential real property from 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. Existing law excludes an owner or operator of a mobilehome park and an owner of a mobilehome or their agent from these provisions. This bill would, until January 1, 2030, prohibit the management of a mobilehome park from increasing the gross rental rate for a tenancy for a mobilehome space 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, as specified. The bill would prohibit management of a mobilehome park from increasing the gross rental rate for a tenancy in more than 2 increments over a 12-month period, after the tenant maintains a tenancy over a 12-month period. The bill would exempt specified mobilehome spaces from these provisions, including, among others, mobilehome spaces restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government agency, or other recorded document as affordable for very low, low-, or moderate-income persons and families and mobilehome spaces within a resident-owned mobilehome park. The bill would specify that these provisions apply to rent increases for mobilehome spaces occurring on or after February 20, 2020. The bill would provide that in the event that management increased the rent by more than the amount specified above between February 20, 2020, and January 1, 2021, the applicable rent on January 1, 2021, shall be the rent as of February 20, 2020, plus the maximum permissible increase, and that management shall not be liable to the homeowner for any corresponding rent overpayment. The bill would authorize management who increased the rent by less than the amount specified above between February 20, 2020, and January 1, 2021, to increase the rent twice within 12 months of February 20, 2020, but not by more than the amount specified above. The bill would void any waiver of the rights under these provisions. 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 or residential circumstances from these provisions, including, among others, housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years and certain housing that is not owned by specified entities, including a corporation or limited liability corporation in which at least one member is a corporation, if specified notice is provided to the tenant. The act defines the term "owner" to exclude an owner or operator of a mobilehome park and an owner of a mobilehome or their agent from these provisions. This bill would, for purposes of these provisions, redefine the term "owner" to include an owner or operator of a mobilehome park and an owner of a mobilehome or their agent. The bill would exclude mobilehomes from the provision that exempts housing issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years from the just cause requirements. The bill would exclude certain mobilehomes from these provisions, including mobilehomes that are not owned by the management of a mobilehome park or any of the other entities specified above, if notice is provided to the tenant as specified. The bill would require an owner of a mobilehome subject to these provisions to provide written notice of these provisions to a tenant, as specified.