Asm. Sharon Quirk-Silva

(1) Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a "neighborhood multifamily project" to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define "eligible parcel" to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2) Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 12-mile or 14-mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3) By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) 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 various programs, including, among others, the Emergency Housing and Assistance Program, to provide assistance to homeless persons. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law establishes the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council to oversee the implementation of the Housing First guidelines and regulations, to create partnerships with specified entities, including the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Continuum of Care Program, and, among other things, to identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. This bill would require the council to report to the Legislature recommendations for statutory changes to streamline the delivery of services and enhance the effectiveness of homelessness programs in the state, by January 1, 2022.

Existing law requires each school district or county superintendent of schools maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, and, commencing with the 2019–20 school year, each charter school, to provide each needy pupil with one nutritionally adequate free or reduced-price meal during each schoolday. Existing law authorizes a school district or county office of education, in order to comply with that requirement, to use funds made available through any federal or state program the purpose of which includes the provision of meals to a pupil, including, among other programs, the federal School Breakfast Program and the federal National School Lunch Program, or to provide those meals at the expense of the school district or county office of education. This bill would require a school district, county office of education, or charter school that does not participate in the federal National School Lunch Program or the federal School Breakfast Program to provide adequate space for children to consume those meals. The bill would require such a school district, county office of education, or charter school to annually report to the State Department of Education an alternative meal program each of its schoolsites will follow to ensure that each needy pupil is provided with a free or reduced-price meal, and would require the department to provide a form to report this information. The bill would require the department to conduct onsite reviews of schoolsites to verify a school district's, county office of education's, or charter school's compliance with the federal meal benefit issuance requirements and meal pattern regulations under the federal National School Lunch Program or the federal School Breakfast Program. The bill would require the department to report to the Legislature the results of the onsite reviews and a list of noncompliant schoolsites. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47613.5 of the Education Code proposed by AB 842 to be operative only if this bill and AB 842 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 49550 of the Education Code proposed by AB 842 and AB 1595 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 842 and AB 1595 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. 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 Ortiz-Pacheco-Poochigian-Vasconcellos Cal Grant Program, establishes the Cal Grant A and B Entitlement Awards, the California Community College Transfer Entitlement Awards, the Competitive Cal Grant A and B Awards, the Cal Grant C Awards, and the Cal Grant T Awards under the administration of the Student Aid Commission, and establishes eligibility requirements for awards under these programs for participating students attending qualifying institutions. Existing law specifies the amounts of the maximum Cal Grant A and B awards for students attending private nonprofit postsecondary institutions of higher education and private for-profit postsecondary educational institutions that are regionally accredited, as specified. Beginning with the 2020–21 award year, the maximum tuition award is either $9,084 or $8,056, depending upon whether the number of new unduplicated transfer students accepted by private nonprofit postsecondary educational institutions who have been given associate degree for transfer commitments, as defined, in the prior award year meet and exceed specified targets. This bill would change, in accordance with a prescribed formula, the maximum Cal Grant award for tuition for a new recipient attending an independent institution of higher education, commencing with the 2020–21 award year. This bill would provide that the award amount for a student attending an independent institution of higher education may be determined in the annual Budget Act if the independent institutions of higher education, as a group, do not accept the specified number of transfer students who have been given associate degree for transfer commitments.

Existing law establishes a public school financing system that requires state funding for county superintendents of schools, school districts, and charter schools to be calculated pursuant to a local control funding formula, as specified. Existing law requires funding pursuant to the local control funding formula to include, in addition to a base grant, supplemental and concentration grant add-ons that are based on the percentage of pupils who are English learners, foster youth, or eligible for free or reduced-price meals, as specified, served by the county superintendent of schools, school district, or charter school. Existing law requires the State Board of Education to adopt regulations that govern the expenditure of funds apportioned pursuant to the supplemental and concentration grant add-ons. This bill would require the State Department of Education to develop, on or before January 1, 2021, a tracking mechanism for school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to use to report the types of services on which they spend their supplemental and concentration grant funds. The bill would require each local educational agency, commencing July 1, 2021, to annually report to the department the types of services on which it spends its supplemental and concentration grant funds using the tracking mechanism developed by the department. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, 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.

This measure would recognize September 2020 as Sickle Cell Disease Awareness Month and encourage the Legislature to appropriate funds for research, treatment, and monitoring of sickle cell disease, and for related education and outreach.

This measure would urge specified state departments and the Attorney General to use their authority to ensure that health care service plans and health insurers subject to their authority comply with the federal Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008.

(1) Existing law establishes a right of individuals with exceptional needs to receive a free appropriate public education, and ensures the right to special instruction and related services needed to meet their unique needs, in conformity with federal law. Existing law provides for individualized education programs for blind, low vision, and visually impaired pupils, as defined. This bill would express legislative findings and declarations relating to the need for blind or visually impaired pupils to receive instruction in the expanded core curriculum. The bill would authorize school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to consider elements of the expanded core curriculum when developing individualized education programs for a pupil who is blind, has low vision, or is visually impaired. The bill, if an orientation and mobility evaluation is needed for a pupil who is blind, has low vision, or is visually impaired, would require that these evaluations be conducted by appropriately certified specialists, as specified, and occur in familiar and unfamiliar environments, in varying lighting conditions, and in the home, school, and community, as appropriate. By imposing new duties on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools, the bill would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) 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.