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. This bill, among other things, would require a proposed housing development containing 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district. The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving the construction of 2 residential units, including, but not limited to, authorizing a city or county to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to 2 units, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency's processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps, and the modification of those maps. Under the Subdivision Map Act, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map expires 24 months after its approval or conditional approval or after any additional period of time as prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 12 months, except as provided. This bill, among other things, would require a city or county to ministerially approve a parcel map or tentative and final map for an urban lot split that meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the urban lot split would not require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the parcel is located within a residential zone, and that the parcel is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district. The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving an urban lot split, including, but not limited to, authorizing a city or county to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of 2 units on either of the resulting parcels, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The bill would also extend the limit on the additional period that may be provided by ordinance, as described above, from 12 months to 24 months and would make other conforming or nonsubstantive changes. 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. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the ministerial review processes described above, would thereby exempt the approval of projects subject to those processes from CEQA. By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Sponsored bills
(1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law requires the commission to develop, implement, and administer the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) program to encourage deployment of high-quality advanced communications services to all Californians. Existing law provides that the goal of the program is to, no later than December 31, 2022, approve funding for infrastructure projects that will provide broadband access to no less than 98% of California households, as provided. Existing law requires the commission, in approving infrastructure projects, to approve projects that provide last-mile broadband access to households that are unserved by an existing facility-based broadband provider, and give preference to projects in areas where internet connectivity is only available through dial-up service, as provided. Existing law authorizes the commission to collect a sum not to exceed $330,000,000 to implement the CASF program through the imposition of a surcharge that is collected starting on January 1, 2018, and continuing through the 2022 calendar year. Existing law prohibits the surcharge collected for the CASF program from exceeding $66,000,000 unless the commission determines that collecting a higher amount of surcharge for the CASF program in any year will not result in an increase in all surcharges collected from telephone customers for that year. This bill would instead require the commission to develop, implement, and administer the California Advanced Services Fund program to encourage deployment of 21st century-ready communications, as provided. The bill would provide that the goal of the program is instead to, no later than December 31, 2024, approve funding for infrastructure projects that will provide high-capacity, future-proof infrastructure, as defined, based on current engineering and scientific information available at the time of program application, to no less than 98% of California households, as provided. The bill would require the commission, in approving infrastructure projects, to approve projects with a goal of providing high-capacity, future-proof infrastructure to households that are unserved areas, as defined, or unserved high-poverty areas, as defined, prioritize projects in unserved areas and unserved high-poverty areas where internet connectivity is available only below specified speed thresholds or not at all, and ensure that no awardee receives a grant for an infrastructure project for which the awardee has already received the full cost of the project from a federal grant. The bill would repeal the authority of the commission to increase the maximum amount of the surcharge collected for the CASF program in any year if the commission makes the above-described determination. Existing law establishes the Broadband Infrastructure Grant Account in the CASF, and makes moneys in the account available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for grants for projects that deploy infrastructure capable of providing broadband access at speeds of at least 10 megabits per second (mbps) downstream and one mbps upstream to unserved households and provide last-mile infrastructure to unserved households, as specified. Existing law requires the commission to annually offer an existing facility-based broadband provider the opportunity to demonstrate that it will deploy broadband or upgrade existing facilities to a delineated unserved area within 180 days, with opportunity for extension beyond the 180 days, as provided, if the commission makes a specified finding. This bill would revise the requirements applicable to grants awarded from the account. The bill would require an eligible project to deploy infrastructure capable of providing broadband access at speeds of at least 25 mbps downstream and 25 mbps upstream and with a latency that is sufficiently low to allow real-time interactive applications to unserved areas and unserved high-poverty areas, and provide last-mile infrastructure to unserved areas and unserved high-poverty areas. The bill would require the commission to annually offer an existing facility-based broadband provider the opportunity to demonstrate that it will deploy broadband or upgrade existing facilities to a delineated unserved area within 90 days, rather than 180 days. Existing law authorizes an individual household or property owner to be eligible to apply for a grant from the account to offset the costs of connecting the household or property to an existing or proposed facility-based broadband provider. Existing law requires the aggregate amount of these grants to not exceed $5,000,000. This bill would delete these provisions. (2) Existing law requires the commission to conduct various interim and final audits of the California Advanced Services Fund to ensure that funds have been expended in accordance with the approved terms of the grant awards and loan agreements, as specified. Existing law requires the commission to report the interim findings to the Legislature by April 1, 2020. This bill would require the commission to also report interim findings by April 1, 2022. (3) Existing law requires the commission to, until April 1, 2023, annually provide a report to the Legislature that includes certain information, including the remaining unserved areas in the state, the status of the California Advanced Services Fund balance, and the projected amount to be collected in each year through 2022. This bill would instead require the commission to provide this report until April 1, 2025. The bill would require that the information specified above include the remaining unserved areas and unserved high-poverty areas in the state and the status of the fund balance and the projected amount to be collected in each year through 2024.
Existing law, the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement (STAKE) Act, prohibits a person from selling or otherwise furnishing tobacco products, as defined, to a person under 21 years of age. Existing law also prohibits the use of tobacco products in county offices of education, on charter school or school district property, or near a playground or youth sports event, as specified. This bill would prohibit a tobacco retailer, or any of the tobacco retailer's agents or employees, from selling, offering for sale, or possessing with the intent to sell or offer for sale, a flavored tobacco product or a tobacco product flavor enhancer, as those terms are defined, except as specified. The bill would make a violation of this prohibition an infraction punishable by a fine of $250 for each violation. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature that these provisions do not preempt or prohibit the adoption and implementation of local ordinances that impose greater restrictions on the access to tobacco products than the restrictions imposed by the bill, as specified. The bill would state that its provisions are severable. By creating a new crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the California Safe Drinking Water Act, provides for the operation of public water systems and imposes on the State Water Resources Control Board various responsibilities and duties. The act authorizes the state board to order consolidation with a receiving water system where a public water system or a state small water system, serving a disadvantaged community, as defined, consistently fails to provide an adequate supply of safe drinking water. The act, if consolidation is either not appropriate or not technically and economically feasible, authorizes the state board to contract with an administrator to provide administrative and managerial services to designated public water systems and to order the designated public water system to accept administrative and managerial services, as specified. Existing law, the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, provides the exclusive authority and procedure for the initiation, conduct, and completion of changes of organization and reorganization for cities and districts, except as specified. This bill would create the Small System Water Authority Act of 2019 and state legislative findings and declarations relating to authorizing the creation of small system water authorities that will have powers to absorb, improve, and competently operate noncompliant public water systems. The bill, no later than March 1, 2020, would require the state board to provide written notice to cure to all public agencies, private water companies, or mutual water companies that operate a public water system that has either less than 3,000 service connections or that serves less than 10,000 people, and are not in compliance, for the period from July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019, with one or more state or federal primary drinking water standard maximum contaminant levels, as specified. The bill would require the state board to provide a copy of the notice, in the case of a water corporation, to the Public Utilities Commission and would require the Public Utilities Commission to be responsible with the state board for ensuring compliance with the provisions of the bill. The bill would require an entity receiving the notice to respond to the state board, and, if appropriate, the Public Utilities Commission, as to whether the violations of drinking water standards are remedied and the basis for that conclusion, as specified. The bill would require an entity reporting a continuing violation of drinking water standards to have 180 days from the date of a specified response filed with the state board to prepare and submit a plan to the state board to permanently remedy a violation of drinking water standards within a reasonable time that is not later than January 1, 2025. The bill would require the state board to review the plan and accept, accept with reasonable conditions, or reject the plan, as prescribed. The bill would require an entity with an accepted plan to provide quarterly reports to the state board on progress towards a permanent remedy for violations of drinking water standards and would require the state board to annually hold a public hearing to consider whether the progress is satisfactory. The bill would require the state board, if it rejects the plan or if a plan is not submitted by the prescribed deadline, to cause, after a certain period to allow for a petition for reconsideration, the formation of an authority by the applicable local agency formation commission to serve the customers of the public water system or to remedy the failure to meet the applicable drinking water standards, as specified. The bill would require the state board, no later than July 1, 2021, to provide written notice to each county, city, water district, private water company, or mutual water company located within a county where an entity receiving a notice to cure from the state board is located stating that the state board may consider the formation of an authority within that county and inviting other public water suppliers to consider a voluntary dissolution and subsequent inclusion into the authority that may be formed. The bill would require an entity wishing to consolidate into a proposed authority to provide a written statement opting into an authority to the administrator of the authority on or before December 31, 2021. The bill would authorize an entity wishing to join an authority after the formation of an authority to do so by a proposal or petition to the local agency formation commission and would authorize an entity's customers to petition to the state board that the entity be included in a proposed authority, as prescribed. The bill would require any county or city receiving a notice to cure from the state board to determine, not later than November 1, 2021, whether any county service areas, county waterworks districts, or other dependent special districts providing water service or water and sewer service located within the county that provide water service or water and sewer service only in the proposed area of the authority should be included within the proposed authority, as prescribed. The bill would authorize an authority to include areas that are not contiguous. The bill would require the state board, no later than 30 days after determining that an authority shall be formed, to notify a local agency formation commission of a county where the public water system that submitted the plan is located, and if appropriate, the Public Utilities Commission, that it has determined that the public water system shall be consolidated into an authority. The bill would require the state board, no later than 60 days after determining that an authority shall be formed, to notify the local agency formation commission, and if appropriate, the Public Utilities Commission, of the public water systems that will be consolidated into an authority and to appoint an administrator for each proposed authority. The bill would require an administrator to be responsible for the interim administration and management of the authority and would require the state board to bear the cost of the administrator, as specified. The bill would require the administrator, after consultation with the executive officer of the local agency formation commission, to submit to the state board a conceptual formation plan, with specified components. The bill would require the state board to provide comments on the conceptual formation plan to the administrator and applicable local agency formation commission within 60 days of its receipt. The bill would require the administrator, within 180 days after the state board provides comments on the draft conceptual formation plan, to submit an application for formation and proposed plan for service to the local agency formation commission for review and would require the commission to hold a hearing on the plan and approve or deny it, as prescribed. The bill would require an authority to file a statement, under penalty of perjury, with the executive office of the local agency formation commission certifying that the authority will take the appropriate actions to comply with an approved plan. By expanding the application of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the executive officer of the commission, within 30 days of the filing of a statement, to issue a notice of completion to the authority and send a copy of that notice to the state board. The bill would authorize the state board, in the event that the authority fails to timely file a statement certifying compliance with the plan, to issue an order to the authority requiring the filing of a statement certifying compliance with the plan or other remedial action as may be appropriate. The bill would require, annually for the first 3 years after the date of an authority's formation by a local agency formation commission, an authority to file a certain report with the local agency formation commission and the state board. The bill would require a local agency formation commission to hold a public hearing within 90 days of receipt of the report to review the authority's performance during the previous year and would authorize the state board to order an authority to remedy any failures to comply with conditions imposed by the state board or the plan for service. The bill would authorize the state board to impose a civil penalty on an authority of up to $500 per day for each violation if an authority fails to timely comply with a remedial order by the state board, up to a maximum of $10,000 per year for each particular violation. The bill would require the Public Utilities Commission to order the dissolution of a public water system and the transfer of all assets of a subject water corporation to an authority formed by the local agency formation commission, as prescribed. The bill would require the state board to petition a court for an order dissolving any mutual water company, water corporation, or private corporation that has been operating a public water system and transferring the assets of that company or corporation to the authority formed by the local agency formation commission. The bill would provide for an owner or shareholder of a dissolved public water system to be compensated, as specified, in accordance with a distressed business valuation issued by the state board. The bill would authorize an authority to receive financing from the state to pay all liabilities assumed from a public water system and would require an authority to issue bonds to repay the state with interest. The bill would require the Controller, following the formation of the authorities, to perform an audit of the fiscal and operational health of each authority, and to submit the results of the audits to the Legislature in the form of a report no later than January 1, 2026. The bill would require the state board, no later than January 1, 2026, to prepare and submit to the Legislature a report specifying the number of public water systems that, at any time between July 1, 2018, and January 1, 2025, were out of compliance with one or more state or federal primary drinking water standards, as specified. The bill would provide for the appointment of an initial board of an authority, and the election of subsequent boards of an authority. The bill would require a director to be a resident of the area served by the authority and, to the extent practicable, to represent a division with equal population being served by the authority. The bill would authorize a director to receive compensation in an amount not to exceed $250 per day, not to exceed a total of 10 days in any calendar month, together with any expenses incurred in the performance of the director's duties required or authorized by the board. The bill would require the board to hold meetings, exercise and perform all powers, privileges, and duties of an authority, designate a depository to have custody of the funds of the authority, appoint officers, and hire employees, as specified. The bill would require the board to file a certain certificate with the Secretary of State within 180 days of its initial meeting after formation. The bill would require a person convicted of an infraction for a violation of any local ordinance or regulation adopted by an authority to be punished upon a first conviction by a fine not exceeding $50 and for a 2nd conviction within a period of one year by a fine of not exceeding $100 and for a 3rd or any subsequent conviction within a period of one year by a fine of not exceeding $250. By creating new crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would specify the powers of an authority, including that an authority is authorized to acquire, control, distribute, store, spread, sink, treat, purify, recycle, recapture, and salvage any water, including sewage and stormwater, for the beneficial use of the authority. The bill would authorize the authority to fix a water standby assessment or availability charge, as prescribed. The bill would require a board of supervisors to levy the standby charge in the amounts for the respective parcels fixed by the board of the authority. The bill would require all county officers charged with the duty of collecting taxes to collect authority standby charges with the regular tax payments to the county and would require the charges to be paid to the authority. The bill would authorize an authority to restrict the use of authority water, as specified, and would provide that it is a misdemeanor, punishable as specified, for any person to use or apply water received from the authority contrary to or in violation of any restriction or prohibition specified in the authority's ordinance. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize an authority to conduct inspections and would authorize an authority to obtain an inspection warrant. Because the willful refusal of an inspection lawfully authorized by an inspection warrant is a misdemeanor, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program by expanding the application of a crime. The bill would require an authority to notify the county or city building inspector, county health inspector, or other affected county or city employee or office, in writing, within a reasonable time if an actual violation of an authority, city, or county ordinance is discovered during the investigation. The bill would require the administrator to prepare and submit a capital improvement plan to the state board no later than one year after the date upon which an authority is formed. The bill would require the plan to bring the authority into full compliance with drinking water standards within 3 years, which time may be extended by the state board for good cause. The bill would require the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature from the General Fund, or, to the extent funds are available from bond revenues or other sources, including federal, state, academic, or other public or private entities, to provide funding for the administrator and for formation and startup costs for up to 3 fiscal years after formation of the authority, as specified. The bill would provide for the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature from the General Fund, or, to the extent funds are available from bond revenues or other sources, including federal, state, academic, or other public or private entities, to receive up to $7,200,000 for the preparation of distressed business valuations to determine the net fair market value of the water corporation or mutual water company. The bill would provide for the state board and the Public Utilities Commission, upon appropriation by the Legislature from the General Fund, or, to the extent funds are available from bond revenues or other sources, including federal, state, academic, or other public or private entities, to receive up to $15,500,000 and $1,150,000, respectively, for the dissolution of public water systems and water corporations pursuant to the bill's provisions. The bill would require, if those moneys are not sufficient to meet the statewide needs of the authorities, funding to be made available upon appropriation from the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. By imposing new duties or a higher level of service on cities, counties, and local agency formation commissions, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law permits the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency during conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property, including epidemics. Existing law provides that the proclamation takes effect immediately, affords specified powers to the Governor, and terminates upon further proclamation by the Governor. The Governor proclaimed a state of emergency March 4, 2020, related to the COVID-19 pandemic. An executive order issued by the Governor on March 27, 2020, and extended on May 29, 2020, prohibits the eviction of residential tenants during the pendency of a state of emergency, except as specified. Under the executive order, this protection is effective through July 28, 2020. Existing law establishes a procedure, known as an unlawful detainer action, that a landlord must follow in order to evict a tenant. Existing law provides that a tenant is subject to such an action if the tenant continues to possess the property without permission of the landlord in specified circumstances, including when the tenant has violated the lease by defaulting on rent or failing to perform a duty under the lease. 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. This bill would authorize an owner of real property and a tenant to sign and execute a tenant-owner COVID-19 eviction relief agreement that, during a state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and unspecified additional days, would allow the tenant to defer the tenant's unpaid rent, and would prohibit the owner from serving a notice terminating the tenancy or filing a complaint for unlawful detainer for that unpaid rent or during the state of emergency, unless an exception applies. The agreement would require the tenant to repay the unpaid rent to the state as installments in accordance with a specified repayment schedule, or ahead of the repayment schedule, during taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2034. The bill would require the owner of real property to offer the tenant a signed copy of the agreement, along with a specified notice, prior to executing the tenant-owner COVID-19 eviction relief agreement, and would make related changes. The bill would require the owner of real property to obtain a signed acknowledgment of receipt from the tenant if the tenant declines the offer. If the tenant does not respond to the offer, the bill would require the owner to confirm, under penalty of perjury, that the owner hand-delivered or mailed the offer. By expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would void any demand for the payment of unpaid rent accrued, or any notice to terminate tenancy served, beginning on March 4, 2020, upon the declaration of the state of emergency related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and until the state of emergency is terminated, as provided. The bill would, during the state of emergency, prohibit an owner of real property from demanding payment of unpaid rent, serving a notice terminating tenancy, or filing a complaint for unlawful detainer, among other things, unless the owner includes a signed acknowledgment of receipt or a sworn confirmation of a rejected offer for a tenant-owner COVID-19 eviction relief agreement. This bill would grant a tenant who has entered into a COVID-19 eviction relief agreement an affirmative defense in any unlawful detainer action brought by the owner. The bill would also stay any eviction action where a party to the eviction action produces a signed COVID-19 eviction relief agreement. (2) Existing law authorizes the Franchise Tax Board to require any person to withhold for income tax purposes an amount of a taxpayer's income, as specified, that reasonably represents the amount of tax due, as determined by the board. Existing law also provides for the collection of various debts by the Franchise Tax Board, including fines, state or local penalties, bail, forfeitures, restitution fines, restitution orders, and other amounts imposed by specified state courts and delinquent tax debt due to the federal Internal Revenue Service. This bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to calculate the repayment installments of unpaid rent, and would authorize a tenant to apply for reduction or forgiveness of repayment installments depending on the taxpayer's income. The bill would require specified persons to withhold the amount of each installment from each tenant's income during taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2034, as provided. The bill would require the Franchise Tax Board to transfer these moneys to the Treasurer to be deposited in the General Fund. This bill would specify that any deferment or repayment of rent authorized under these provisions is not included when determining the lowest gross rental rate for purposes of the Tenant Protection Act of 2019. (3) Existing law, the Personal Income Tax Law, and the Corporation Tax Law, impose taxes upon taxable income, and in conformity with federal income tax law, generally defines "gross income" for purposes of those laws as income from whatever source derived, except as specifically excluded, and provides various exclusions from gross income. Existing law authorizes various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Tax Relief and Refund Account in the General Fund and provides that payments required to be made to taxpayers or other persons from the Personal Income Tax Fund are to be paid from that account, including any amount allowable as an earned income tax credit in excess of any tax liabilities. This bill, for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2034, would exclude from gross income the gross amount of unpaid rent in a signed and executed tenant-owner COVID-19 eviction relief agreement that is reduced or forgiven by the Franchise Tax Board, as described above. This bill would allow a credit against those taxes for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2034, to a qualified taxpayer who is an owner of real property, as specified, in an amount equal to the gross amount of unpaid rent deferred by the qualified taxpayer in a signed and executed tenant-owner COVID-19 eviction relief agreement between the qualified taxpayer and a tenant that meets the requirements described above, or in an amount equal to the gross amount of unpaid rent deferred plus inflation of at least 2% if the qualified taxpayer is a small business owner. The bill would require the qualified taxpayer to register with the Franchise Tax Board, and would require the board to approve the reservation, as specified. The bill would authorize the qualified taxpayer to claim the credit in any taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2034, of the qualified taxpayer's choosing, or to sell the credit to an unrelated party, subject to specified conditions. If the amount allowable as a credit exceeds the qualified taxpayer's tax liability for the taxable year, the bill would authorize the qualified taxpayer to choose whether to be refunded the balance from the Tax Relief and Refund Account upon appropriation by the Legislature or to carry over the balance to reduce the taxpayer's tax liability in the following taxable years, as provided. The bill would require the Director of Finance to make certain adjustments relating to the General Fund and the operation of the provisions of the bill. (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 housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, including the Multifamily Housing Program, pursuant to which the department provides financial assistance in the form of deferred payment loans to pay for the eligible costs of development for specified types of housing projects. Existing law also establishes the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, administered by the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, for the purpose of providing jurisdictions with one-time grant funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges, as provided. Existing law requires that the California Workforce Development Board and each local workforce development board ensure that programs and services funded by the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 and directed to apprenticeable occupations are conducted in coordination with apprenticeship programs approved by the Division of Apprenticeship Standards, as specified. Existing law also establishes the Strategic Growth Council and, among other things, requires the council to manage and award grants and loans to support the planning and development of sustainable communities. Existing law also establishes the State Coastal Conservancy in the Natural Resources Agency with prescribed powers and responsibilities for implementing a program of agricultural land protection, area restoration, and resources enhancement within the coastal zone, as defined. Existing law establishes the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, known as "GO-Biz," within the Governor's office to serve the Governor as the lead entity for economic strategy and the marketing of California on issues relating to business development, private sector investment, and economic growth. This bill, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would make up to $2,000,000,000 available in each fiscal year for the purpose of providing emergency economic recovery and development, climate change, and disaster response. Of the amount made available for any fiscal year, the bill would require the Controller to allocate $1,808,000,000, or a proportional amount of the total available amount for the applicable fiscal year, among various housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program, and for distribution by the California Workforce Development Board among local agencies to participate in, invest in, or partner with new or existing preapprenticeship training programs established as described above. The bill would require the Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency to establish deadlines for applications and submitting final reports under the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program with respect to moneys allocated to that program under the bill. Of the amount made available for any fiscal year under its provisions, the bill would require the Controller to allocate $192,000,000, or a proportional amount of the total available amount for the applicable fiscal year, to the State Coastal Conservancy, the Strategic Growth Council, and GO-Biz, to be used for the Climate, Sea Level, and Natural Disaster Program and the Community Economic Development Program. The bill would require the State Coastal Conservancy and the Strategic Growth Council, in consultation with the Office of Planning and Research or any other appropriate state agency, to allocate $100,000,000, or a proportional amount, under the Climate, Sea Level, and Natural Disaster Program among specified eligible entities for the purpose of protecting communities dealing with the effects of climate change, as specified. The bill would require GO-Biz, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development and any other appropriate state agency, council, or department, to allocate $92,000,000, or a proportional amount, under the Community Economic Development Program among these specified eligible entities for various purposes relating to community development. The bill would require eligible applicants to comply with specified requirements, including submitting plans for outreach to, and retention of, women, minority, disadvantaged youth, formerly incarcerated, and other underrepresented subgroups and, subject to certain exceptions, certifying that a skilled and trained workforce, as defined, will be used to complete any project funded under those programs. By requiring the certification of certain information, thereby expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission has regulatory authority over public utilities, including telephone corporations. Existing law requires the commission to develop and implement performance reliability standards for backup power systems installed on the property of residential and small commercial customers by a facilities-based provider of telephony services upon determining that the benefits of the standards exceed the costs. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the Office of Emergency Services and the telecommunications industry, by July 1, 2021, to develop and implement backup electrical supply rules, as specified, for telecommunications service, as defined, that is provided within a commission-designated Tier 2 or Tier 3 High Fire Threat District. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill would be a part of the act and because a violation of a commission action implementing the bill's requirements would be a crime, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards. This bill would require that a housing development project be a use by right upon the request of an independent institution of higher education or religious institution that partners with a qualified developer on any land owned in fee simple by the applicant on or before January 1, 2020, if the development satisfies specified criteria. The bill would define various terms for these purposes. Among other things, the bill would require that 100% of the units, exclusive of manager units, in a housing development project eligible for approval as a use by right under these provisions be affordable to lower income households, except that 20% of the units may be for moderate-income households, provided that all the units are provided at affordable rent or affordable housing cost, as specified. The bill would authorize the development to include ancillary uses on the ground floor of the development, as specified. This bill would specify that a housing development project that is eligible for approval as a use by right under the bill is also eligible for a density bonus or other incentives or concessions, except as specified. The bill would require a development subject to these provisions to provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the ordinance applies. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any parking requirement on a development subject to these provisions if the development is located within one-half mile walking distance of a high-quality transit corridor or major transit stop, as those terms are defined, and within one block of a car share vehicle. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California 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 does not apply to the ministerial approval of projects. This bill, by requiring approval of certain development projects as a use by right, would expand the exemption for ministerial approval of projects under CEQA. By adding to the duties of local planning officials with respect to approving certain development projects, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Planning and Zoning Law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development. If the inventory of sites does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all households pursuant to specified law, existing law requires the local government to rezone sites within specified time periods and that this rezoning accommodate 100% of the need for housing for very low and low-income households on sites that will be zoned to permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right for specified developments. This bill, the Neighborhood Homes Act, would deem a housing development project, as defined, an allowable use on a neighborhood lot, which is defined as a parcel within an office or retail commercial zone. The bill would require the density for a housing development under these provisions to meet or exceed the density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households according to the type of local jurisdiction, including a density of at least 20 units per acre for a suburban jurisdiction. The bill would require the housing development to meet all other local requirements for a neighborhood lot, other than those that prohibit residential use, or allow residential use at a lower density than that required by the bill. The bill would provide that a housing development under these provisions is subject to the local zoning, parking, design, and other ordinances, local code requirements, and procedures applicable to the processing and permitting of a housing development in a zone that allows for the housing with the density required by the act. The bill would also require that a housing development under these provisions comply with public notice, comment, hearing, or other procedures applicable to a housing development in a zone with the applicable density. The bill would provide that the existing zoning designation applies if the existing zoning designation for the parcel allows residential use at a density greater than that required by these provisions. The bill would require a local agency to require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to the bill's provisions be for a term longer than 30 days. The bill would authorize a local agency to exempt a neighborhood lot from these provisions in its land use element of the general plan if the local agency concurrently reallocates the lost residential density to other lots so that there is no net loss in residential density in the jurisdiction, as provided. The bill would specify that it does not alter or affect the application of any housing, environmental, or labor law applicable to a housing development authorized by these provisions, including, but not limited to, the California Coastal Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, the Housing Accountability Act, obligations to affirmatively further fair housing, and any state or local affordability laws or tenant protection laws. The bill would require an applicant of a housing development under these provisions to provide notice of a pending application to each commercial tenant of the neighborhood lot. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by the Neighborhood Homes Act address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. 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, as defined for purposes of the act, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or an emergency shelter unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That act states that it shall not be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring a housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, except as provided. That act further provides that a housing development project or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. The bill would provide that for purposes of the Housing Accountability Act, a proposed housing development project is consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision if the housing development project is consistent with the standards applied to the parcel pursuant to specified provisions of the Neighborhood Homes Act and if none of the square footage in the project is designated for hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging use, except for a residential hotel, as defined. The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2026, also authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards, including a requirement that the site on which the development is proposed is zoned for residential use or residential mixed-use development, or has a general plan designation that allows residential use or a mix of residential and nonresidential uses, with at least 23 of the square footage of the development designated for residential use. Under that law, the proposed development is also required to be consistent with objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards in effect at the time the development is submitted to the local government. This bill would permit the development to be proposed for a site zoned for office or retail commercial use if the site has had no commercial tenants on 50% or more of its total usable net interior square footage for a period of at least 3 years prior to the submission of the application. The bill would also provide that a project located on a neighborhood lot, as defined, shall be deemed consistent with objective zoning standards, objective design standards, and objective subdivision standards if the project is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Neighborhood Homes Act. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 authorizes a local agency to establish a community facilities district to finance various services, including police protection, fire protection, recreation programs, and library services, and provides for the annexation of territory to an existing community facilities district. This bill would authorize an applicant seeking to develop a housing project on a neighborhood lot to request that a local agency establish a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District, or to request that the neighborhood lot be annexed to an existing community facilities district, as specified, to finance improvements and services to the units proposed to be developed. The bill would prohibit any further proceedings to be taken to annex the territory, or to authorize that annexation in the future, for a period of one year from the decision of the legislative body at the hearing on the annexation if a specified number or groups of persons, including 50% or more of the registered voters or 6 registered voters, whichever is more, residing within the territory proposed for annexation or proposed to be annexed in the future, file written protests with the legislative body. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing any development, impact, or mitigation fee, charge, or exaction in connection with the approval of a development project to the extent that those facilities and services are funded by a community facilities district established pursuant to these provisions. By imposing new duties on local agencies with regard to local planning and zoning, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
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 establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA. This bill would, until January 1, 2025, establish specified procedures for the administrative and judicial review of the environmental review and approvals granted for projects located in specified counties that are funded, in whole or in part, by specified public funds or public agencies and that meet certain requirements. Because a public agency would be required to comply with those new procedures, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Judicial Council, by March 31, 2021, to adopt rules of court applicable to an action or proceeding brought to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification or adoption of an environmental review document or the granting of project approvals, including any appeals therefrom, to be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of the filing of the certified record of proceedings with the court to an action or proceeding seeking judicial review of the lead agency's action related to those projects. The bill would require a party seeking to file an action or proceeding pursuant to CEQA to provide the lead agency and the real party in interest a notice of intent to sue within 10 days of the posting of a certain notice and would prohibit a court from accepting the filing of an action or proceeding from a party that fails to provide the notice of intent to sue. The bill would also require a qualified opportunity fund that finances, in whole or in part, a qualified project to provide, to the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development and upon initial application for a qualified project and every 6 months thereafter, specified information regarding the fund and the qualified opportunity zone in which the project is located. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the Counties of Fresno, Madera, Merced, Monterey, San Benito, and Stanislaus. 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.