Existing law permits any party to file a notice of motion and motion to strike the whole or any part of a pleading. Under existing law, a party may file with the trial court a special motion to strike a cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue. This bill would permit a party to file with the trial court a special motion to strike the whole or any part of a pleading in all civil actions brought by any plaintiff to challenge the approval or permitting of a priority housing development project, as defined. The bill would require the trial court to deny the motion to strike if it determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim. The bill would entitle a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike to recover their attorney's fees and costs, except as specified. Except as specified, the bill would require the filing of a special motion to strike within 60 days of the service of the complaint, or in the court's discretion, at any later time the court deems proper. The bill would provide that if the court determines the administrative record is required for its decision, the moving party may, notwithstanding the filing deadlines above, file the special motion to strike within 60 days of the service of the administrative record or, in the court's discretion, at any later time the court deems proper. The bill would require the court to make its determination on the special motion to strike on the pleadings, supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based, and if applicable, the administrative record. The bill would provide that an order granting or denying this special motion to strike is appealable, as specified.
Sponsored bills
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. Existing law, the Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act, establishes the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee within the Department of Housing and Community Development. Existing law requires the committee to allocate state low-income housing tax credits in conformity with state and federal law that establishes a maximum rent that may be charged to a tenant for a project unit constructed using low-income housing tax credits. This bill would require that a housing development project be a use by right upon the request of an applicant who submits an application for streamlined approval, on any land owned by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution on or before January 1, 2024, if the development satisfies specified criteria, including that the development is not adjoined to any site where more than one-third of the square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use. 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, and 5% of the units may be for staff of the independent institution of higher education or the religious institution that owns the land, provided that the units affordable to lower income households are offered at affordable rent, as set in an amount consistent with the rent limits established by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 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, incentives, or concessions, or waivers or reductions of development and parking standards, 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 state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or 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 public transit, either a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, as those terms are defined, or it is within one block of a car share vehicle. This bill would require a local government that determines a proposed development is in conflict with any objective planning standards, as specified, to provide the developer with written documentation explaining those conflicts under a specified timeframe. The bill would provide that the development shall be deemed to satisfy the required objective planning standards if the local government fails to provide the requisite documentation explaining any conflicts. The bill would authorize a local government to conduct a design review, as described, only if the design review focuses on compliance with the requisite criteria of a streamlined, ministerial review process. The bill would prohibit a local government from using a design review, as specified, from inhibiting, chilling, or precluding a streamlined, ministerial approval. The bill would require a local government to issue a subsequent permit for developments approved under the provisions of this act. 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. The bill would repeal its provisions as of January 1, 2036. 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.
Existing law, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, defines and regulates common interest developments, including the establishment and imposition of assessments. Existing law limits increases in regular assessments and the aggregate of special assessments that the board may impose in any fiscal year without the approval of a majority of a quorum of members, as specified. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an association that records its original declaration on or after January 1, 2025, from imposing an increase of a regular assessment on the owner of a deed-restricted affordable housing unit that is more than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, not to exceed 10% greater than the preceding regular assessment for the association's preceding fiscal year.
(1) Existing law, the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Housing Finance Act, establishes the Bay Area Housing Finance Agency to raise, administer, and allocate funding for affordable housing in the San Francisco Bay area, as defined, and provide technical assistance at a regional level for tenant protection, affordable housing preservation, and new affordable housing production. Existing law requires the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority and executive board of the Association of Bay Area Governments to form an advisory committee composed of 9 representatives with knowledge and experience in the areas of affordable housing finance and development, tenant protection, and housing preservation. This bill would require the authority and executive board to form an advisory committee composed of at least 9 and no more than 11 representatives with knowledge and expertise in the areas of affordable housing finance, construction workforce, and development, tenant protection, and housing preservation. The act provides the authority with various powers, including the power to place a measure on the ballot to raise revenue and allocate funds throughout the San Francisco Bay area, apply for and receive grants or loans from public and private entities, incur and issue bonds and other indebtedness, and otherwise incur liabilities or obligations. The act authorizes the authority to allocate and deploy financing to cities, counties, other public agencies within the San Francisco Bay area and private affordable housing developers to finance affordable housing development, as specified. This bill would specify that the authority is limited to placing only one measure on the ballot per election. The bill would also authorize the authority to deploy financing to nonprofit corporations to finance affordable housing development, as specified. Existing law authorizes a city or county, or an agency created pursuant to a joint powers agreement, to issue revenue bonds to defray the costs of acquiring home mortgages or making loans to lending institutions in order to enable them to make home mortgages, and the costs of studies and surveys, insurance premiums, underwriting fees, legal, accounting and marketing services incurred in connection with the issuance and sale of bonds, as specified. This bill would authorize the authority to issue mortgage revenue bonds, pursuant to provisions described above; acquire, hold, develop, operate, and dispose of real property; and create one or more California limited liability companies of which the authority is the sole member. (2) 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. This bill would exempt from CEQA any actions taken by the authority to raise, administer, or allocate funding for tenant protection, affordable housing preservation, or new affordable housing production or to provide technical assistance consistent with the authority's purpose. (3) Existing law authorizes the executive board of the authority to impose a commercial linkage fee, as defined, in an amount not to exceed ten dollars ($10) per square foot, within the San Francisco Bay area, as specified. Existing law requires the expenditures of proceeds from a commercial linkage fee be limited to affordable housing production, preservation, and tenant protection programs. This bill would authorize the expenditures of proceeds from a commercial linkage fee to include the authority's related administrative costs. (4) The act defines "authority revenues" to include, without limitation, revenues generated by any special tax, fee, or charge imposed by the authority, other than ad valorem property taxes. Existing law, the Revenue Bond Law of 1941, requires a local agency to annually publish a summary statement showing, among other things, the amount of gross revenues from revenue bonds. This bill would revise and recast the definition of "authority revenue" to also include loan repayments, investment income, or income derived from the ownership or operation of real property. The bill would provide for prioritization of spending of authority revenues. The bill would require the authority to publish the above-described summary statement not more than 9 months after the close of each fiscal year. (5) Existing law requires the authority to distribute regional housing revenue, as defined, in the form of a grant, loan, or other financing tool in a manner that achieves certain minimum shares over 5-year periods. In this regard, existing law requires 5% of those regional housing revenues for tenant protection programs for low- and moderate-income households, which includes, among other things, preeviction and eviction legal services and providing emergency rental assistance for lower income households. This bill would include homelessness prevention services, as specified, as an eligible expense under tenant protection programs for low- and moderate-income households. (6) Existing law requires the authority to distribute funds received through the authorized funding measures according to specified provisions, which in part require each county to adopt a county expenditure plan applicable to county housing revenue. Existing law requires, in order for the expenditure plan to be deemed complete, the expenditure plan to specify, among other things, a description of any specific project or program proposed to receive funding. This bill would additionally require the plan to demonstrate that the county has consulted with each city in the county, excluding cities that receive a direct allocation. (7) Existing law requires, if the authority proposes a measure that will generate revenues and that requires voter approval, the board of supervisors of the relevant county or counties to call a special election on the measure. Existing law requires each county included in the measure to use the exact ballot question, impartial analysis, and summary of the expenditure plan provided by the authority. Existing law requires these materials to include, among other things, an estimate of the number of affordable housing units to be built or preserved by household income category served, and a description of any specific projects planned to be funded. This bill would instead require each county included in the measure to use the election materials provided by the authority, including the exact ballot question, impartial analysis, and full text of the ballot measure for inclusion in the voter information pamphlet. The bill would make conforming changes. By changing the duties of local officials with respect to elections procedures for revenue measures on behalf of the authority, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (8) 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 regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies, and prohibits a landlord from demanding or receiving security for a rental agreement for residential property, however denominated, in an amount or value in excess of an amount equal to 2 months' rent, in the case of unfurnished residential property, and an amount equal to 3 months' rent, in the case of furnished residential property, in addition to any rent for the first month paid on or before initial occupancy. This bill would, beginning July 1, 2024, instead prohibit a landlord from demanding or receiving security for a rental agreement for residential property in an amount or value in excess of an amount equal to one month's rent, regardless of whether the residential property is unfurnished or furnished, in addition to any rent for the first month paid on or before initial occupancy. The bill, unless the prospective tenant is a service member, as defined, would prohibit a landlord from demanding or receiving security for a rental agreement for residential property in an amount or value in excess of 2 months' rent, in addition to any rent for the first month, if the landlord (1) is a natural person or a limited liability corporation in which all members are natural persons and (2) owns no more than 2 residential rental properties that collectively include no more than 4 dwelling units offered for rent.
Existing law requires a prosecuting attorney, upon the request of a victim or a witness of a crime, to inform the victim or witness by letter of the final disposition of the case within 60 days of the final disposition. This bill would instead require the prosecuting attorney, upon the request of a victim or a witness of a crime, to inform the victim or witness by letter of the final disposition of the case within 30 days. Existing law requires all law enforcement agencies, medical facilities, crime laboratories, and any other facilities that receive, maintain, store, or preserve sexual assault evidence kits to conduct an audit of all untested sexual assault evidence kits in their possession and required these entities to report certain data to the Department of Justice by no later than July 1, 2019. Existing law required the Department of Justice to prepare and submit a report to the Legislature regarding the results of these audits by no later than July 1, 2020. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to prepare an information profile on each kit in the department's SAFE-T database, and to develop a process to allow a survivor to track and receive updates regarding their sexual assault evidence kit. This bill would require all law enforcement agencies, medical facilities, public crime laboratories, and any other facilities that receive, maintain, store, or preserve sexual assault evidence kits to conduct an audit of all untested sexual assault evidence kits in their possession. The bill would require each law enforcement agency and public crime laboratory to create a record in the SAFE-T database for every victim sexual assault kit that has not had DNA testing completed, as specified, by no later than July 1, 2026. The bill would specify that the SAFE-T database not include sexual assault evidence kits collected from suspects, but would require those kits to also be subject to the audit, as specified. The bill would require each medical facility and other non-law enforcement entity to report certain data relating to untested kits to the Department of Justice by no later than July 1, 2026. The bill would additionally require the Department of Justice to prepare and submit a report to the Legislature regarding the results of these audits by no later than July 1, 2027. By requiring local government entities to complete an audit and submit a report, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a victim to request that a kit collected from them not be tested, and would exempt that kit from being tested. 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 Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, provides a comprehensive set of procedures for the enforcement of express and implied warranties on consumer goods, as defined. Under existing law, every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product, including televisions, radios, audio or video recording equipment, major home appliances, antennas, and rotators, with a wholesale price to the retailer of not less than $50 nor more than $99.99 is required to make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of the product for at least 3 years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the 3-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product. Existing law also requires every manufacturer making an express warranty with respect to an electronic or appliance product, as described above, with a wholesale price to the retailer of $100 or more, to make available to service and repair facilities sufficient service literature and functional parts to effect the repair of the product for at least 7 years after the date a product model or type was manufactured, regardless of whether the 7-year period exceeds the warranty period for the product. This bill would enact the Right to Repair Act. The bill would require, except as specified and regardless of whether any express warranty is made, the manufacturer of an above-described electronic or appliance product, in the above-described circumstances, and in those same circumstances but sold to others outside of direct retail sales, to make available, on fair and reasonable terms, to product owners, service and repair facilities, and service dealers, the means, as described, to effect the diagnosis, maintenance, or repair of the product, as provided. The bill would also require a service and repair facility or service dealer that is not an authorized repair provider, as defined, of a manufacturer to provide a written notice of that fact to any customer seeking repair of an electronic or appliance product before the repair facility or service dealer repairs the product, and to disclose if it uses replacement parts that are used or from a supplier that is not the manufacturer. The bill would also authorize a city, a county, a city and county, or the state to bring an action in superior court to impose civil penalties on a person or entity for violating the Right to Repair Act, as provided. The bill would make these requirements and enforcement provisions operative on July 1, 2024.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to refuse to grant a request by any employee to take up to 5 days of bereavement leave upon the death of a family member. This bill would additionally make it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to refuse to grant a request by an eligible employee to take up to 5 days of reproductive loss leave following a reproductive loss event, as defined. The bill would require that leave be taken within 3 months of the event, except as described, and pursuant to any existing leave policy of the employer. The bill would provide that if an employee experiences more than one reproductive loss event within a 12-month period, the employer is not obligated to grant a total amount of reproductive loss leave time in excess of 20 days within a 12-month period. Under the bill, in the absence of an existing policy, the reproductive loss leave may be unpaid. However, the bill would authorize an employee to use certain other leave balances otherwise available to the employee, including accrued and available paid sick leave. The bill would make leave under these provisions a separate and distinct right from any right under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The bill would make it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to retaliate against an individual, as described, because of the individual's exercise of the right to reproductive loss leave or the individual's giving of information or testimony as to reproductive loss leave, as described. The bill would require the employer to maintain employee confidentiality relating to reproductive loss leave, as specified. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law provides that libel is a false and unprivileged written publication that injures the reputation and that slander is a false and unprivileged publication, orally uttered, that injures the reputation, as specified. Existing law makes certain publications and communications privileged and therefore protected from civil action, including complaints of sexual harassment by an employee, without malice, to an employer based on credible evidence and communications between the employer and interested persons regarding a complaint of sexual harassment. This bill would include among those privileged communications a communication made by an individual, without malice, regarding an incident of sexual assault, harassment, or discrimination, as defined, and would specify the attorney's fees and damages available to a prevailing defendant in any defamation action brought against that defendant for making that communication.
Existing law requires that specified actions for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault, as defined, be commenced within 22 years of the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority or within 5 years of the date the plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered that psychological injury or illness occurring after the age of majority was caused by the sexual assault, whichever occurs later. Existing law prohibits certain of those actions from commencing on or after the plaintiff's 40th birthday unless the person or entity knew or had reason to know, or was otherwise on notice, of any misconduct that creates a risk of childhood sexual assault by an employee, volunteer, representative, or agent, or the person or entity failed to take reasonable steps or to implement reasonable safeguards to avoid acts of childhood sexual assault, as specified. Existing law revives claims that would otherwise have been barred as of January 1, 2020, because the applicable statute of limitations, claim presentation deadline, or any other time limit had expired and authorizes the claims to be commenced within specified time periods. This bill would eliminate time limits for the commencement of actions for the recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault, as specified. The bill would eliminate the prohibition on certain actions proceeding on or after the plaintiff's 40th birthday unless specified conditions are met. The bill would specify that its provisions apply to any claim in which the childhood sexual assult occurred on and after January 1, 2024.