Existing law delegates to the Fish and Game Commission the power to regulate the taking or possession of birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles, except as provided. Under existing law, a mammal occurring naturally in California that is not a game mammal, fully protected mammal, or fur-bearing mammal is a nongame mammal and may not be taken or possessed except as provided in the Fish and Game Code or in accordance with regulations adopted by the commission. Under existing law, bobcats are not designated as a game mammal, fully protected mammal, or fur-bearing mammal. Existing law prohibits, or authorizes the commission to prohibit, the trapping of bobcats under certain circumstances, as specified. Existing law authorizes any owner or tenant of land or property that is being damaged or destroyed, or is in danger of being damaged or destroyed, by specified animals, not including bobcats, to apply to the Department of Fish and Wildlife for a depredation permit to kill the animals. Existing law requires the department, upon satisfactory evidence of the damage or destruction, actual or immediately threatened, to issue a revocable depredation permit for the taking and disposition of the animals under regulations adopted by the commission. Existing law authorizes nongame mammals, among other specified species, that are found to be injuring growing crops or other property to be taken at any time or in any manner by specified persons in accordance with the Fish and Game Code and regulations adopted pursuant to that code. Existing law authorizes the department to enter into cooperative agreements with any state or federal agency for the purpose of controlling harmful nongame mammals. Existing law also authorizes the department to enter into cooperative contracts with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for the control of nongame mammals. Under existing law, a violation of the Fish and Game Code is a crime. This bill would make it unlawful to hunt, trap, or otherwise take a bobcat, except under specified circumstances, including under a depredation permit. The bill, upon appropriation of funds by the Legislature for this purpose, commencing January 1, 2025, would authorize the commission to open a bobcat hunting season in any area determined by the commission to require a hunt, as specified. The bill would prohibit the take of bobcats under the above-described authorizations for the take of nongame mammals. The bill would require the department, before opening a bobcat season and in consultation with specified entities, to develop, upon appropriation by the Legislature, a bobcat management plan to inform and coordinate management decisions regarding bobcat populations, as specified. The bill would require the department to submit the bobcat management plan to the commission and the Legislature. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would provide that its provisions are severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
(1) Proposition 6, an initiative measure approved by the electors at the November 3, 1998, general election, enacted the Prohibition of Horse Slaughter and Sale of Horsemeat for Human Consumption Act of 1998. The act makes it unlawful, and punishable as a felony, for any person to possess, to import into or export from the state, or to sell, buy, give away, hold, or accept any horse with the intent of killing, or having another kill, that horse, if that person knows or should have known that any part of that horse will be used for human consumption. The act also makes it unlawful to offer horsemeat for sale for human consumption. The Equine Protection Act of 1991 creates a program of equine protection and identification in the Department of Food and Agriculture. The act prohibits any person from purchasing, consigning, selling, or accepting the donation of an animal, defined as a horse, pony, mule, or burro, that is destined for slaughter unless a written bill of sale or any written instrument containing specified information is provided, as prescribed. The act makes it a misdemeanor if any person does not keep the necessary written records with respect to these transactions and other transactions subject to the act, refuses to show the records to a peace officer or to allow copies to be made of the record, or destroys the record within a specified period of time. This bill would instead require a written bill of sale or written instrument to be provided when any person purchases, consigns, sells, or accepts the donation of an animal, as defined in the act, at a public or private auction, as prescribed. The bill would require a person who purchases an animal in these circumstances to sign a sworn statement, under penalty of perjury, acknowledging and agreeing to comply with Proposition 6. The bill would require, before any animal could be sold at an auction, the operator of the auction yard to determine whether the animal has an implanted microchip or has been tattooed or branded with an identifying mark. If the animal has an implanted microchip, a tattoo, or a brand, the bill would require the operator of the auction yard to post, on its internet website and through any active social media in which the operator of the auction yard participates, all identifying information, as provided, for at least 24 hours. The bill would also require, for a minimum of one year following the date of sale of each animal sold at auction, the operator of the auction yard to maintain specified records that document compliance with the above provisions. The bill would require the operator of the auction yard to provide access to these records upon the request of the Department of Food and Agriculture, a law enforcement officer, an animal control agency, or a humane officer, as provided. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, and by expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require, in addition to any other penalties available under law, a person who violates these provisions to be subject to a civil penalty of $1,000 for the first offense and $2,000 for the 2nd and each subsequent offense. (2) Existing law requires that, at any public auction or sale where equines are sold, a specified notice be posted conspicuously or inserted into the consignment agreement, as specified, by the management of the auction or sale warning buyers and sellers that horses sold there may be purchased for slaughter and that, as a possible safeguard, the seller can set the minimum bid above current slaughter prices. Existing law requires the management of the auction or sale to post current slaughter prices or to make them available to sellers upon request. This bill would instead require that notice or agreement to warn buyers that the sale of horses in California for slaughter for human consumption is a felony and would make a conforming change. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes the Office of Emergency Services within the office of the Governor and under the supervision of the Director of Emergency Services and makes the Office of Emergency Services responsible for the state's emergency and disaster response services for natural, technological, or manmade disasters and emergencies. This bill would establish the California State Nonprofit Security Grant Program under the administration of the director to improve the physical security of nonprofit organizations that are at high risk of violent attacks or hate crimes due to ideology, beliefs, or mission, as specified. The bill would make the operation of the program contingent upon an appropriation in the annual Budget Act for these purposes. The bill would repeal those provisions on January 1, 2025. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, after a community facilities district has been created and authorized to levy specified special taxes, authorizes the legislative body, by ordinance, to levy the special taxes at the rate and apportion them in the manner specified in the resolution forming the community facilities district. The act requires properties or entities of the state, federal, or local governments, except as otherwise provided, to be exempt from the special tax. This bill would also require property receiving a welfare exemption, as specified, to be exempt from the special tax. The bill would require this exemption to apply to taxes imposed by an ordinance adopted on or after January 1, 2020. The Planning and Zoning Law provides that any action by a city, county, city and county, or other local governmental agency in this state is null and void if it denies to any individual or group of individuals the enjoyment of residence, landownership, tenancy, or any other land use in this state because of, among other things, the method of financing of any residential development of the individual or group of individuals. That law also prohibits a city, county, city and county, or other local governmental agency from prohibiting or discriminating against a residential development or emergency shelter because of, among other things, the method of financing. This bill would define "method of financing" for the purposes described above to include the eligibility to claim a welfare exemption, as specified. The Housing Accountability Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, 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 or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes one of specified findings, including that the housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable, as provided, or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. The act defines "specific, adverse impact" for this purpose and prohibits inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation from constituting a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. This bill would additionally prohibit the eligibility to claim a welfare exemption, as specified, from constituting a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.5 of the Government Code proposed by SB 330 and SB 592 to be operative only if this bill and either or both SB 330 and SB 592 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law requires the ordinance to designate areas where accessory dwelling units may be permitted and authorizes the designated areas to be based on criteria that includes, but is not limited to, the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety. This bill would instead require a local agency to designate these areas based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from issuing a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before issuing a certificate of occupancy for the primary residence. (2) Existing law requires an ordinance providing for the creation of accessory dwelling units, as described above, to impose standards on accessory dwelling units, including, among other things, lot coverage. Existing law also requires such an ordinance to require that the accessory dwelling units be either attached to, or located within, the living area of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or detached from the proposed or existing primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the proposed or existing primary dwelling. This bill would delete the provision authorizing the imposition of standards on lot coverage and would prohibit an ordinance from imposing requirements on minimum lot size. The bill would revise the requirements for an accessory dwelling unit by providing that the accessory dwelling unit may be attached to, or located within, an attached garage, storage area, or an accessory structure, as defined. (3) Existing law prohibits a local agency from requiring a setback for an existing garage that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit. Existing law requires that an accessory dwelling unit that is constructed above a garage have a setback of no more than 5 feet. This bill would instead prohibit a setback requirement for an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit. The bill would also instead require a setback of no more than 4 feet for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. (4) Existing law provides that replacement offstreet parking spaces, required by a local agency when a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit, except as provided. This bill would instead prohibit a local agency from requiring the replacement of offstreet parking spaces when a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished or converted, as described above. (5) Existing law requires a local agency to ministerially approve or deny a permit application for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit within 120 days of receiving the application. This bill would instead require a local agency to ministerially approve or deny a permit application for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the local agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. The bill would authorize the permitting agency to delay acting on the permit application if the permit application is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, as specified. (6) Existing law prohibits a local agency from utilizing standards to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that is zoned for residential use that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling other than the criteria described above, except, among one other exception, a local agency may require an applicant for a permit to be an owner-occupant of either the primary or accessory dwelling unit as a condition of issuing a permit. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would prohibit a local agency from imposing an owner-occupant requirement, as described above. (7) Existing law authorizes a local agency to establish minimum and maximum unit size limitations on accessory dwelling units, provided that the ordinance permits an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. This bill would prohibit a local agency from establishing a minimum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that prohibits an efficiency unit, as defined. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from establishing a maximum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that is less than 850 square feet, and 1,000 square feet if the accessory dwelling unit contains more than one bedroom. The bill would also instead prohibit a local agency from establishing any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and minimum lot size for either attached or detached dwelling units that prohibits at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit that is at least 16 feet in height and with a 4-foot side and rear yard setbacks. (8) Existing law prohibits a local agency from imposing parking standards for an accessory dwelling unit if, among other conditions, the accessory dwelling unit is located within 12 mile of public transit. This bill would make that prohibition applicable if the accessory dwelling unit is located within 12 mile walking distance of public transit, and would define public transit for those purposes. (9) Existing law requires a local agency to ministerially approve an application for a building permit to create within a zone for single-family use one accessory dwelling unit per single family lot of the unit that is contained within the existing space of a single-family residence or accessory structure when specified conditions are met, including that the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety. This bill would instead require ministerial approval of an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to create the following: (1) one accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if certain requirements are met; (2) a detached, new construction accessory dwelling unit that meets certain requirements and would authorize a local agency to impose specified conditions relating to floor area and height on that unit; (3) multiple accessory dwelling units within the portions of an existing multifamily dwelling structure provided those units meet certain requirements; or (4) not more than 2 accessory dwelling units that are located on a lot that has an existing multifamily dwelling, but are detached from that multifamily dwelling and are subject to certain height and rear yard and side setback requirements. (10) Existing law prohibits a local agency, special district, or water corporation from considering an accessory dwelling unit to be a new residential use for purposes of calculating fees or capacity charges. This bill would establish an exception from the above-described prohibition in the case of an accessory dwelling unit that was constructed with a new single-family home. (11) Existing law requires a local agency to submit a copy of the adopted ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development and authorizes the department to review and comment on the ordinance. This bill would instead authorize the department to submit written findings to the local agency as to whether the ordinance complies with the statute authorizing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit, and, if the department finds that the local agency's ordinance does not comply with those provisions, would require the department to notify the local agency within a reasonable time. The bill would require the local agency to consider the department's findings and either amend its ordinance to comply with those provisions or adopt it without changes and include specified findings. If the local agency does not amend it ordinance or does not adopt those findings, the bill would require the department to notify the local agency and authorize it to notify the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to adopt guidelines to implement uniform standards or criteria to supplement or clarify the provisions authorizing accessory dwelling units. (12) Existing law defines the term "accessory dwelling unit" for these purposes to mean an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons. This bill would revise the definition to additionally require an accessory dwelling unit be located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence in order for the provisions described above to apply. (13) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code proposed by SB 13 to be operative only if this bill and SB 13 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (14) By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (15) 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. (16) This 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, including charter cities.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a local agency, by ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, to provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in single-family and multifamily residential zones in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law requires any ordinance adopted by a local agency to comply with certain criteria, including that it require accessory dwelling units to be either attached to, or located within, the proposed or existing primary dwelling or detached if located within the same lot, and that it does not exceed a specified amount of total area of floor space. This bill would, instead, authorize the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use. The bill would also revise the requirements for an accessory dwelling unit by providing that the accessory dwelling unit may be attached to, or located within, an attached garage, storage area, or other structure, and that it does not exceed a specified amount of total floor area. (2) Existing law generally authorizes a local agency to include in the ordinance parking standards for accessory dwelling units, including authorizing a local agency to require the replacement of parking spaces if a garage, carport, or covered parking is demolished to construct an accessory dwelling unit. Existing law also prohibits a local agency from imposing parking standards on an accessory dwelling unit if it is located within one-half mile of public transit. This bill would, instead, prohibit a local agency from requiring the replacement of parking spaces if a garage, carport, or covered parking is demolished to construct an accessory dwelling unit. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from imposing parking standards on an accessory dwelling unit that is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit, and would define the term "public transit" for those purposes. (3) Existing law authorizes a local agency to establish minimum and maximum unit size limitations on accessory dwelling units, provided that the ordinance permits an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development standards. This bill would prohibit a local agency from establishing a minimum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that prohibits an efficiency unit, as defined. The bill would also prohibit a local agency from establishing a maximum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that is less than 850 square feet, and 1,000 square feet if the accessory dwelling unit contains more than one bedroom. The bill would also instead prohibit a local agency from establishing any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and minimum lot size for either attached or detached dwelling units that prohibit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit that is at least 16 feet in height and with a 4-foot side and rear yard setbacks. (4) Existing law prohibits a local agency from utilizing standards to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that is zoned for residential use that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling other than the criteria described above, except that, among one other exception, a local agency may require an applicant for a permit to be an owner-occupant of either the primary or accessory dwelling unit as a condition of issuing a permit. This bill, until January 1, 2025, would instead prohibit a local agency from imposing an owner-occupant requirement as described above. (5) Existing law requires a local agency that has not adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units to approve or disapprove the application ministerially and without discretionary review within 120 days after receiving the application. The bill would require a local agency, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance, to consider and approve an application, ministerially and without discretionary review, within 60 days after receiving a completed application. The bill would also provide that, if a local agency does not act on the application within that time period, the application shall be deemed approved. (6) Existing law requires fees for an accessory dwelling unit to be determined in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act. Existing law also requires the connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on either the accessory dwelling unit's size or the number of its plumbing fixtures. This bill would prohibit a local agency, special district, or water corporation from imposing any impact fee, as specified, upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet, and would require any impact fees to be charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more to be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. The bill would revise the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge specified above to either the accessory dwelling unit's square feet or the number of its drainage fixture unit values, as specified. (7) Existing law, for purposes of these provisions, defines "living area" as the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit including basements and attics, but not a garage or accessory structure. This bill would define "accessory structure" to mean a structure that is accessory and incidental to a dwelling located on the same lot. (8) Existing law requires a local agency to submit a copy of the adopted ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development and authorizes the department to review and comment on the ordinance. This bill would instead authorize the department to submit written findings to the local agency as to whether the ordinance complies with the statute authorizing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit, and, if the department finds that the local agency's ordinance does not comply with those provisions, would require the department to notify the local agency within a reasonable time. The bill would require the local agency to consider the department's findings and either amend its ordinance to comply with those provisions or adopt it without changes and include specified findings. If the local agency does not amend it ordinance or does not adopt those findings, the bill would require the department to notify the local agency and authorize it to notify the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to adopt guidelines to implement uniform standards or criteria to supplement or clarify the provisions authorizing accessory dwelling units. (9) Existing law requires the planning agency of each city and county to adopt a general plan that includes a housing element that identifies adequate sites for housing. Existing law authorizes the department to allow a city or county to do so by a variety of methods and also authorizes the department to allow a city or county to identify sites for accessory dwelling units, as specified. This bill would state that a local agency may count an accessory dwelling unit for purposes of identifying adequate sites for housing in accordance with those provisions. (10) Existing law, the State Housing Law, a violation of which is a crime, establishes statewide construction and occupancy standards for buildings used for human habitation. Existing law requires, for those purposes, that any building, including any dwelling unit, be deemed to be a substandard building when a health officer determines that any one of specified listed conditions exists to the extent that it endangers the life, limb, health, property, safety, or welfare of the public or its occupants. This bill would authorize the owner of an accessory dwelling unit built before January 1, 2020, or built on or after January 1, 2020, under specified circumstances, that receives a notice to correct violations or abate nuisances to request that the enforcement of the violation be delayed for 5 years if correcting the violation is not necessary to protect health and safety, as determined by the enforcement agency, subject to specified requirements. The bill would make conforming and other changes relating to the creation of accessory dwelling units. By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, and because the bill would expand the scope of a crime under the State Housing Law, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (11) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code proposed by AB 68 and AB 881 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 68 and AB 881 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (12) 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 California Fair Employment and Housing Act, prohibits housing discrimination, including discrimination through public or private land use practices, decisions, or authorizations, based on specified personal characteristics, including source of income. Existing law defines the term "source of income" for purposes of the provisions relating to discrimination in housing accommodations described above, to mean lawful, verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or paid to a representative of a tenant. Existing law specifies that for the purposes of this definition, a landlord is not considered a representative of a tenant. This bill would instead define the term for purposes of those provisions, to mean verifiable income paid directly to a tenant or to a representative of a tenant, or paid to a housing owner or landlord on behalf of a tenant, including federal, state, or local public assistance and housing subsidies, as specified. The bill would also specify that for the purposes of this definition, a housing owner is not considered a representative of a tenant. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12927 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1497 and SB 222 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1497 or SB 222 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 12955 of the Government Code proposed by SB 222 to be operative only if this bill and SB 222 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
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.
(1) Existing law, commonly known as the Ellis Act, generally prohibits public entities from adopting any statute, ordinance, or regulation, or taking any administrative action, as specified, to compel the owner of residential real property to offer or to continue to offer accommodations, as defined, in the property for rent or lease. Existing law authorizes a public entity acting pursuant to the Ellis Act to require an owner who offers accommodations for rent or lease within a period not exceeding 10 years from the date on which they were withdrawn, as specified, to first offer the unit to the tenant or lessee displaced from that unit by the withdrawal, subject to certain requirements. If the owner fails to comply with this requirement, the owner is liable to a displaced tenant or lessee for punitive damages not to exceed 6 months' rent. This bill would prohibit a payment of the above-described punitive damages from being construed to extinguish the owner's obligation to offer the accommodations to a prior tenant or lessee, as described above. (2) Existing law qualifies the Ellis Act prohibition on compelling owners to offer or to continue to offer accommodations by, among other things, permitting a public entity to require an owner to provide notice that the owner has initiated actions to terminate tenancies and, in this situation, the date of withdrawal of accommodations would be 120 days from the delivery of the notice. Existing law extends the term for the withdrawal of accommodations, in this context, to one year if the tenant or lessee is 62 years of age or older, or disabled, and other conditions are met. This bill, with regard to the withdrawal of accommodations and the extension of tenancies, as described above, would require the date of withdrawal for the accommodations as a whole to be the latest termination date among all tenants within the accommodations for purposes of calculating specified time periods, as specified. The bill would make conforming changes to clarify the application of these provisions with respect to accommodations with multiple units and with respect to requirements to give notice to public entities and tenants with extended tenancies. The bill would also conform a statement of legislative intent relating to the Ellis Act to specify that it is not intended to permit an owner to return to the rental market less than all of the accommodations, among other things. The bill would also amend this statement of legislative intent to make further statements regarding what the act is not intended to permit on the part of an owner.
Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to license and regulate gamete banks, defined as tissue banks that collect, process, store, or distribute gametes, including facilities that provide professional reproductive services. Existing law requires a gamete bank licensed in this state, for gametes collected on or after January 1, 2020, to collect certain identifying information and medical information from a gamete donor, including the donor's full name, date of birth, and address. Existing law also requires a gamete bank to obtain a declaration from the gamete donor stating whether the donor agrees to disclose the donor's identity to a child that results from the donation, upon the child turning 18 years of age and requesting the information. This bill would require a gamete bank to collect and maintain, in addition to the identifying information and medical information described above, any other contact information provided by the donor at the time of the donation and records of gamete screening and testing. The bill would also require a gamete bank that receives gametes collected by another gamete bank to collect and retain contact information for the gamete bank from which the gametes were received, and to disclose that information to a child that results from the donation, upon the child turning 18 years of age and requesting the information. The bill would exempt from these requirements gametes collected from a donor whose identity is known to the recipient of the gametes at the time of the donation. Existing law prescribes the duties of the State Registrar of Vital Statistics (State Registrar) and local registrars of births and deaths with respect to the registration of certificates of live birth, fetal death, or death, and marriage licenses. Existing law prescribes the information to be listed on a certificate of live birth. Existing law prohibits, if the parents are not married to each other, the father's name from being listed on the birth certificate unless the father and mother sign a voluntary declaration of paternity at the hospital before the birth certificate is submitted for registration. Existing law prohibits the birth certificate from being amended to add a father's name at a later date unless paternity has been established in court. This bill, instead, would prohibit the name of the person identified by the woman giving birth as either the only possible genetic parent other than the woman who gave birth or the intended parent of a child conceived through assisted reproduction from being listed on the birth certificate unless the woman who gave birth and the person identified by the woman giving birth as either the only possible genetic parent other than the woman who gave birth or the intended parent of a child conceived through assisted reproduction sign a voluntary declaration of parentage. The bill would authorize the birth certificate to be amended to add another parent's name at a later date only if parentage is established by a court. This bill also makes technical and conforming changes.