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.
Sponsored bills
The California Constitution limits the amount of ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value of that property, defined as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975–76 tax bill and, thereafter, the appraised value of the property when purchased, newly constructed, or a change in ownership occurs after the 1975 assessment, subject to an annual inflation adjustment not to exceed 2%. The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to authorize a person over 55 years of age or any severely and permanently disabled person residing in property eligible for the homeowner's exemption to transfer the base year value of that property to a replacement dwelling of equal or lesser value located in the same county, or another county that has adopted an ordinance allowing base years value transfers from other counties, as provided. The California Constitution also provides that the purchase or transfer of the principal residence, and the first $1,000,000 of other real property, of a transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased, is not a "purchase" or "change in ownership" for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property for taxation. This measure, beginning on and after April 1, 2021, would authorize an owner of a primary residence who is over 55 years of age, severely disabled, or a victim of a wildfire or natural disaster, as defined, to transfer the taxable value, defined as the base year value plus inflation adjustments, of their primary residence to a replacement primary residence located anywhere in the state, regardless of the location or value of the replacement primary residence, that is purchased or newly constructed as that person's principal residence within 2 years of the sale of the original primary residence. The measure would limit a person who is over 55 years of age or severely disabled to 3 transfers under these provisions. The measure, beginning on and after February 16, 2021, would exclude from the terms "purchase" and "change in ownership" for purposes of determining the "full cash value" of property the purchase or transfer of a family home or family farm, as those terms are defined, of the transferor in the case of a transfer between parents and their children, or between grandparents and their grandchildren if all the parents of those grandchildren are deceased. In the case of a transfer of a family home, the measure would require that the property continue as the family home of the transferee. The measure would require that the taxable value of the property be determined as provided. In the case of property tax benefits provided to a family home under these provisions, the bill would require the transferee to claim the homeowner's or disabled veteran's exemption within one year of the transfer. The measure would specify that the above-described provisions relating to transfers between parents or grandparents and children or grandchildren would apply to transfers occurring on or before February 15, 2021. The measure would establish the California Fire Response Fund in the State Treasury. The measure would require the Controller to annually transfer a specified amount, based on calculations by the Director of Finance, of the additional revenues and savings that accrued to the state from the implementation of this measure's provisions from the General Fund to that fund. However, the measure would provide that, if the amount required to be transferred to the California Fire Response Fund exceeds the amount transferred for the previous fiscal year by more than 10%, that excess amount would not be transferred to the California Fire Response Fund. The measure would require the Legislature to appropriate moneys in the fund solely for the purpose of funding fire suppression staffing by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and underfunded special districts that provide fire protection services, as provided. The measure would also establish the County Revenue Protection Fund and continuously appropriate moneys in that fund for the purpose of reimbursing eligible local agencies, as provided. The measure would require the Controller to annually transfer a specified amount, based on the above-described calculations by the Director of Finance, from the General Fund to that fund. The measure would require each county to annually determine the gain of the county and any local agency within the county resulting from the implementation of this measure and, if that amount of gain is negative, provide that specified eligible local agencies may receive a reimbursement from the County Revenue Protection Fund. The measure would require the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to provide a reimbursement to each eligible local agency that has a negative gain, determined every 3 years based on the aggregate gain of the eligible local agency, as provided, and require the Controller to transfer any remaining balance in the County Revenue Protection Fund to the General Fund at the end of each 3-year period, to be available for appropriation for any purpose.
The California Constitution creates the Citizens Redistricting Commission, which is required to adjust the boundary lines of the congressional, State Senatorial, Assembly, and State Board of Equalization districts in the year following the year in which the national census is taken under the direction of Congress at the beginning of each decade. The California Constitution requires the commission to be created no later than December 31 in each year ending in the number zero and requires the commission to approve 4 final maps by August 15 in each year ending in the number one. Existing statutory law also requires the commission, no later than July 1 in each year ending in the number one, to publicly display the first preliminary statewide maps for public comment. This measure would authorize the commission, for 2021 only, to extend the deadlines for final map approval and public display of preliminary maps if the United States Census Bureau fails to provide the commission with necessary state redistricting population data within one year after the decennial census date. The measure would not allow the commission to extend the deadline for final map approval beyond December 15, 2021.
Existing law authorizes a life or disability income insurer to decline a life or disability income insurance application or enrollment request on the basis of positive test results from certain tests, known as the ELISA test and the Western Blot Assay, that detect antibodies to the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) , performed by or at the direction of the insurer. This bill, to become operative January 1, 2023, would instead prohibit an insurer from declining an application or enrollment request for coverage under a policy or certificate for life insurance or disability income insurance based solely on the results of a positive HIV test, regardless of when or at whose direction the test was performed. However, the bill would not prevent or restrict an insurer from refusing to insure an applicant that is HIV positive, limiting the amount, extent, or kind of coverage for an applicant that is HIV positive, or charging a different rate to an applicant that is HIV positive, if the refusal, limitation, or charge is based on sound actuarial principals and actual or reasonably anticipated experience. The bill would define "HIV test" for purposes of these provisions to mean any clinical test, laboratory or otherwise, used to identify HIV, a component of HIV, or antibodies or antigens to HIV. Existing law imposes a civil penalty on a person who negligently or willfully discloses results of an HIV antibody test to any third party, except pursuant to written authorization or informed consent, in a manner that identifies or provides identifying characteristics of the person to whom the test results apply. Under existing law, the penalty for a negligent violation of those provisions is civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $1,000 plus court costs, and the penalty for a willful violation of those provisions is a civil penalty in an amount not less than $1,000 and not more than $5,000 plus court costs. If the negligent or willful disclosure results in economic, bodily, or psychological harm to the subject of the test, existing law makes the person guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for a period not to exceed one year, by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Existing law defines "HIV antibody test" for these purposes to mean an ELISA test or a Western Blot Assay, or both. This bill would eliminate the references to HIV antibody test for purposes of those civil and criminal penalty provisions and instead would impose penalties for the negligent, willful, or malicious disclosure of results of an HIV test, as defined above. The bill would increase the civil penalty for a negligent violation of those provisions to an amount not to exceed $2,500 plus court costs and would increase the civil penalty for a willful violation of those provisions to an amount not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000 plus court costs. The bill would impose the same civil penalty for a malicious violation of those provisions as is provided for the willful violation. The bill would also increase the amount of the fine that may be imposed for a misdemeanor violation of those provisions to an amount not to exceed $25,000. By changing the definition of a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would make conforming changes. 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, the California Coastal Act of 1976, establishes the California Coastal Commission and provides for planning and regulation of development in the coastal zone, as defined. The act requires the commission, within 90 days after January 1, 1977, to adopt, after public hearing, procedures for the preparation, submission, approval, appeal, certification, and amendment of a local coastal program, including a common methodology for the preparation of, and the determination of the scope of, the local coastal programs, as provided. This bill would also include, as part of the procedures the commission is required to adopt, recommendations and guidelines for the identification, assessment, minimization, and mitigation of sea level rise within each local coastal program, as provided. The bill would delete the timeframe specified above by which the commission is required to adopt these procedures. The bill would require the commission to take into account the effects of sea level rise in coastal resource planning and management policies and activities, as provided. In addition, the bill would require state and regional agencies to identify, assess, and, to the extent feasible and consistent with their statutory authorities, minimize and mitigate the impacts of sea level rise. To the extent that a regional agency is a local public agency, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The act makes legislative findings and declarations relating to the basic goals of the state for the coastal zone. This bill would add, as part of those goals, the goal of anticipating, assessing, planning for, and, to the extent feasible, minimizing and mitigating the adverse environmental and economic effects of sea level rise within the coastal zone. (2) Existing law requires the Natural Resources Agency, in collaboration with the Ocean Protection Council, to create and post on an internet website a Planning for Sea Level Rise Database describing steps being taken throughout the state to prepare for, and adapt to, sea level rise. This bill would create within state government the California Sea Level Rise State and Regional Support Collaborative. The bill would require the collaborative to consist of 5 members, as provided, including the Secretary for Environmental Protection and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency. The bill would require the collaborative to provide state and regional information to the public and support to local, regional, and other state agencies for the identification, assessment, and, where feasible, the mitigation of sea level rise. The bill would require, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act, the collaborative to expend no more than $100,000,000 annually from appropriate bond funds and other sources for the purpose of making grants to local governments to update local and regional land use plans to take into account sea level rise and for directly related investments to implement those plans, as provided. The bill would require the Secretary for Environmental Protection and the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, as part of the adoption of the annual Budget Act, to annually appear before the budget committees of both houses of the Legislature regarding the implementation of the above provisions. (3) Existing law establishes the Environmental Justice Small Grant Program under the jurisdiction of the California Environmental Protection Agency, with the purpose to provide grants to eligible community groups that are located in areas adversely affected by environmental pollution and hazards and that are involved in work to address environmental justice issues. Existing law authorizes the Secretary for Environmental Protection to expend up to $1,500,000 per year for purposes of this grant program. This bill would instead authorize the secretary to expend up to $2,000,000 per year for purposes of the grant program and would require up to $500,000 of that money to be expended by the secretary for grants to organizations working to address and mitigate the effects of sea level rise in disadvantaged communities, as defined, impacted by sea level rise. (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, 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 requires any person engaged in the production of human whole blood or human whole blood derivatives to be licensed by the State Department of Public Health. Existing law provides for the regulation of, among others, blood banks and plasma centers, as defined. Existing law requires, before donation of blood or blood components, a donor to be notified in writing that, among other things, their blood or blood components will be tested for evidence of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus, and that donor blood or blood components found to have the antibodies will not be used for transfusion, which is commonly referred to as a deferral. Existing law authorizes a blood bank or plasma center to incorporate voluntary means of self-deferral for donors, as specified. A violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would require a blood bank or plasma center to develop a protocol to provide information to a potential donor who is subject to a deferral, including the reason for the deferral and information relating to standards established pursuant to federal law. The bill would require the information provided under these protocols to be consistent with federal standards and medical standards of care. The bill would require the protocols to be provided to the department annually, and would require the department to review those protocols and compliance as part of the administration and enforcement of licensure. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, 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.