AB 698: Local taxation: real property transfers.
- Session Year: 2025-2026
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2025-06-02
Current Status:
In Progress
(2025-06-09: In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.)
Introduced
In Committee
Awaiting First Chamber Vote
Passed First Chamber
In Committee
Awaiting Second Chamber Vote
Passed Second Chamber
Enacted
Existing statutory law, enacted by Proposition 62, as approved by the voters at the November 4, 1986, statewide general election, prohibits a local government or district from imposing any transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within the city, county, or district, except as provided. The California Constitution authorizes cities organized under a charter to make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, which supersede inconsistent general laws. Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property.
This bill would require a legislative body of a city, as specified, before it adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, to develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on, among other things, the production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
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.
Existing statutory law, enacted by Proposition 62, as approved by the voters at the November 4, 1986, statewide general election, prohibits a local government or district from imposing any transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within the city, county, or district, except as provided. The California Constitution authorizes cities organized under a charter to make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, which supersede inconsistent general laws. Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property.
This bill would require a legislative body of a city, as specified, before it adopts any transaction or sales transfer tax on the sale of real property, to develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on, among other things, the production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects. The bill would require any ballot measure that proposes to implement a transfer tax to include the above-described analysis in the ballot material provided to each voter.
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.
Existing statutory law, enacted by Proposition 62, as approved by the voters at the November 4, 1986, statewide general election, prohibits a local government or district from imposing any transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within the city, county, or district, except as provided. The California Constitution authorizes cities organized under a charter to make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, which supersede inconsistent general laws. Existing law, the Documentary Transfer Tax Act, authorizes the imposition of a tax by a county or city, as provided, with respect to specified instruments that transfer specified interests in real property.
This bill would require a legislative body of a city, as specified, before it adopts any transaction or sales tax on the sale of real property, to develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on, among other things, the production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects. The bill would require any ballot measure that proposes to implement a transfer tax to include the above-described analysis in the ballot material provided to each voter.
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.
Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, prohibits a local agency from disapproving a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or for an emergency shelter, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders the housing development project or emergency shelter infeasible unless it makes specified written findings.This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to those provisions.Existing law, the Housing Accountability Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, prohibits a local agency from disapproving a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or for an emergency shelter, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders the housing development project or emergency shelter infeasible unless it makes specified written findings.
This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to those provisions.
Before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
(a)The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
(b)The production of market-rate housing units.
(c)Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
SEC. 2.The Legislature finds and declares that (a) property tax receipts are reduced by fewer property sales and that a reduction in property tax has a countywide impact, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Section 1 of this act adding Section 37100.6 to the Government Code applies to all cities, including charter cities.
(a)Before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transaction or sales transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
(1)(a)The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
(2)(b)The production of market-rate housing units.
(3)(c)Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
(b)Any ballot measure submitted to the voters of a city that proposes to implement a transfer tax shall include, in the ballot material provided to each voter, the analysis developed pursuant to subdivision (a).SEC. 2.The Legislature finds and declares that (a) the greatly diminished ad valorem property tax revenue, which flows outside the city to counties and into schools, property tax receipts are reduced by fewer property sales and that a reduction in property tax has a countywide impact, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Section 1 of this act adding Section 37100.6 to the Government Code applies to all cities, including charter cities.
(a)Before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transaction or sales tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
(1)The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
(2)The production of market-rate housing units.
(3)Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
(b)Any ballot measure submitted to the voters of a city that proposes to implement a transfer tax shall include, in the ballot material provided to each voter, the analysis developed pursuant to subdivision (a).
SEC. 2.The Legislature finds and declares that (a) the greatly diminished ad valorem property tax revenue, which flows outside the city to counties and into schools, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Section 1 of this act adding Section 37100.6 to the Government Code applies to all cities, including charter cities.
SECTION 1.Section 65589.5 of the Government Code is amended to read:65589.5.(a)(1)The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(A)The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California.(B)California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the states housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing.(C)Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.(D)Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.(2)In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares the following:(A)California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the states environmental and climate objectives.(B)While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable to Californians of all income levels is a key factor.(C)The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted unaffordability.(D)According to reports and data, California has accumulated an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with growth through 2025.(E)Californias overall home ownership rate is at its lowest level since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in home ownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. Only one-half of Californias households are able to afford the cost of housing in their local regions.(F)Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians.(G)The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more than 50 percent of their income toward rent.(H)When Californians have access to safe and affordable housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are less likely to become homeless and in need of government-subsidized services; their children do better in school; and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining employees.(I)An additional consequence of the states cumulative housing shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and middle-class households. Californias cumulative housing shortfall therefore has not only national but international environmental consequences.(J)Californias housing picture has reached a crisis of historic proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income levels, including this section.(K)The Legislatures intent in enacting this section in 1982 and in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of Californias communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled.(L)It is the policy of the state that this section be interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing.(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently.(4)It is the intent of the Legislature that the amendments removing provisions from subparagraphs (D) and (E) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) and adding those provisions to Sections 65589.5.1 and 65589.5.2 by Assembly Bill 1413 (2023), insofar as they are substantially the same as existing law, shall be considered restatements and continuations of existing law, and not new enactments.(b)It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject or make infeasible housing development projects, including emergency shelters, that contribute to meeting the need determined pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action and without complying with subdivision (d).(c)The Legislature also recognizes that premature and unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas.(d)For a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, or for an emergency shelter, a local agency shall not disapprove the housing development project or emergency shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project or emergency shelter infeasible, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following:(1)The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588, is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for the income category proposed for the housing development project, provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the housing development project includes a mix of income categories, and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need for one or more of those categories, then this paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve the housing development project. The share of the regional housing need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards.(2)The housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a specific, adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. The following shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety:(A)Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation.(B)The eligibility to claim a welfare exemption under subdivision (g) of Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.(3)The denial of the housing development project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible.(4)The housing development project or emergency shelter is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project.(5)On the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction had adopted a revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article, and the housing development project or emergency shelter was inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan.(A)This paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing development project proposed on a site, including a candidate site for rezoning, that is identified as suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income households in the jurisdictions housing element if the housing development project is consistent with the density specified in the housing element, even though the housing development project was inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation on the date the application was deemed complete.(B)If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.(6)On the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have an adopted revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article and the housing development project is not a builders remedy project.(e)Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the congestion management program required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).(f)(1)Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (8) of this subdivision, and subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring the housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdictions share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density permitted on the site and proposed by the development. Nothing in this section shall limit a projects eligibility for a density bonus, incentive, or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915.(2)Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring an emergency shelter project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that are consistent with paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdictions need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied by the local agency to facilitate and accommodate the development of the emergency shelter project.(3)Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from imposing fees and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the housing development project or emergency shelter.(4)For purposes of this section, 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.(5)For purposes of this section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or condition approval of the housing development project or emergency shelter.(6)Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, all of the following apply to a housing development project that is a builders remedy project:(A)A local agency may only require the project to comply with the objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that would have applied to the project had it been proposed on a site with a general plan designation and zoning classification that allow the density and unit type proposed by the applicant. If the local agency has no general plan designation or zoning classification that would have allowed the density and unit type proposed by the applicant, the development proponent may identify any objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies associated with a different general plan designation or zoning classification within that jurisdiction, that facilitate the projects density and unit type, and those shall apply.(B)(i)Except as authorized by paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (d), a local agency shall not apply any individual or combination of objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies to the project that do any of the following:(I)Render the project infeasible.(II)Preclude a project that meets the requirements allowed to be imposed by subparagraph (A), as modified by any density bonus, incentive, or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915, from being constructed as proposed by the applicant.(ii)The local agency shall bear the burden of proof of complying with clause (i).(C)(i)A project applicant that qualifies for a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915 shall receive two incentives or concessions in addition to those granted pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65915.(ii)For a project seeking density bonuses, incentives, concessions, or any other benefits pursuant to Section 65915, and notwithstanding paragraph (6) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, for purposes of this paragraph, maximum allowable residential density or base density means the density permitted for a builders remedy project pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h).(iii)A local agency shall grant any density bonus pursuant to Section 65915 based on the number of units proposed and allowable pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h).(iv)A project that dedicates units to extremely low-income households pursuant to subclause (I) of clause (i) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (h) shall be eligible for the same density bonus, incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards as provided to a housing development project that dedicates three percentage points more units to very low income households pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 65915.(v)All units dedicated to extremely low-income, very low income, low-income, and moderate-income households pursuant to paragraph (11) of subdivision (h) shall be counted as affordable units in determining whether the applicant qualifies for a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915.(D)(i)The project shall not be required to apply for, or receive approval of, a general plan amendment, specific plan amendment, rezoning, or other legislative approval.(ii)The project shall not be required to apply for, or receive, any approval or permit not generally required of a project of the same type and density proposed by the applicant.(iii)Any project that complies with this paragraph shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, redevelopment plan and implementing instruments, or other similar provision for all purposes, and shall not be considered or treated as a nonconforming lot, use, or structure for any purpose.(E)A local agency shall not adopt or impose any requirement, process, practice, or procedure or undertake any course of conduct, including, but not limited to, increased fees or inclusionary housing requirements, that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project is a builders remedy project.(F)(i)A builders remedy project shall be deemed to be in compliance with the residential density standards for the purposes of complying with subdivision (b) of Section 65912.123.(ii)A builders remedy project shall be deemed to be in compliance with the objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards for the purposes of complying with paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4.(G)(i)(I)If the local agency had a local affordable housing requirement, as defined in Section 65912.101, that on January 1, 2024, required a greater percentage of affordable units than required under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h), or required an affordability level deeper than what is required under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h), then, except as provided in subclauses (II) and (III), the local agency may require a housing development for mixed-income households to comply with an otherwise lawfully applicable local affordability percentage or affordability level. The local agency shall not require housing for mixed-income households to comply with any other aspect of the local affordable housing requirement.(II)Notwithstanding subclause (I), the local affordable housing requirements shall not be applied to require housing for mixed-income households to dedicate more than 20 percent of the units to affordable units of any kind.(III)Housing for mixed-income households that is required to dedicate 20 percent of the units to affordable units shall not be required to dedicate any of the affordable units at an income level deeper than lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.(IV)A local agency may only require housing for mixed-income households to comply with the local percentage requirement or affordability level described in subclause (I) if it first makes written findings, supported by a preponderance of evidence, that compliance with the local percentage requirement or the affordability level, or both, would not render the housing development project infeasible. If a reasonable person could find compliance with either requirement, either alone or in combination, would render the project infeasible, the project shall not be required to comply with that requirement.(ii)Affordable units in the development project shall have a comparable bedroom and bathroom count as the market rate units.(iii)Each affordable unit dedicated pursuant to this subparagraph shall count toward satisfying a local affordable housing requirement. Each affordable unit dedicated pursuant to a local affordable housing requirement that meets the criteria established in this subparagraph shall count towards satisfying the requirements of this subparagraph. This is declaratory of existing law.(7)(A)For a housing development project application that is deemed complete before January 1, 2025, the development proponent for the project may choose to be subject to the provisions of this section that were in place on the date the preliminary application was submitted, or, if the project meets the definition of a builders remedy project, it may choose to be subject to any or all of the provisions of this section applicable as of January 1, 2025.(B)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 65941.1, for a housing development project deemed complete before January 1, 2025, the development proponent may choose to revise their application so that the project is a builders remedy project, without being required to resubmit a preliminary application, even if the revision results in the number of residential units or square footage of construction changing by 20 percent or more.(8)A housing development project proposed on a site that is identified as suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income households in the jurisdictions housing element, that is consistent with the density specified in the most recently updated and adopted housing element, and that is inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation on the date the application was deemed complete, shall be subject to the provisions of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (D) of paragraph (6) and paragraph (9).(9)For purposes of this subdivision, objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies means criteria that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal, including, but not limited to, any standard, ordinance, or policy described in paragraph (4) of subdivision (o). Nothing herein shall affect the obligation of the housing development project to comply with the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code. In the event that applicable objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies are mutually inconsistent, a development shall be deemed consistent with the criteria that permits the density and unit type closest to that of the proposed project.(g)This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency shelter, is a critical statewide problem.(h)The following definitions apply for the purposes of this section:(1)Feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.(2)Housing development project means a use consisting of any of the following:(A)Residential units only.(B)Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses that meet any of the following conditions:(i)At least two-thirds of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use.(ii)At least 50 percent of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets both of the following:(I)The project includes at least 500 net new residential units.(II)No portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except a portion of the project may be designated for use as a residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code.(iii)At least 50 percent of the net new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets all of the following:(I)The project includes at least 500 net new residential units.(II)The project involves the demolition or conversion of at least 100,000 square feet of nonresidential use.(III)The project demolishes at least 50 percent of the existing nonresidential uses on the site.(IV)No portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except a portion of the project may be designated for use as a residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code.(C)Transitional housing or supportive housing.(D)Farmworker housing, as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code.(3)(A)Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households means housing for lower income households, mixed-income households, or moderate-income households.(B)Housing for lower income households means a housing development project in which 100 percent of the units, excluding managers units, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, at an affordable cost, as defined by Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent set in an amount consistent with the rent limits established by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. The units shall be subject to a recorded deed restriction for a period of 55 years for rental units and 45 years for owner-occupied units.(C)(i)Housing for mixed-income households means any of the following:(I)A housing development project in which at least 7 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to extremely low income households, as defined in Section 50106 of the Health and Safety Code.(II)A housing development project in which at least 10 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.(III)A housing development project in which at least 13 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.(IV)A housing development project in which there are 10 or fewer total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, that is on a site that is smaller than one acre, and that is proposed for development at a minimum density of 10 units per acre.(ii)All units dedicated to extremely low income, very low income, and low-income households pursuant to clause (i) shall meet both of the following:(I)The units shall have an affordable housing cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.(II)The development proponent shall agree to, and the local agency shall ensure, the continued affordability of all affordable rental units included pursuant to this section for 55 years and all affordable ownership units included pursuant to this section for a period of 45 years.(D)Housing for moderate-income households means a housing development project in which 100 percent of the units are sold or rented to moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, at an affordable housing cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. The units shall be subject to a recorded deed restriction for a period of 55 years for rental units and 45 years for owner-occupied units.(4)Area median income means area median income as periodically established by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code.(5)Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2030, deemed complete means that the applicant has submitted a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 or, if the applicant has not submitted a preliminary application, has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that the application is not complete.(6)Disapprove the housing development project includes any instance in which a local agency does any of the following:(A)Votes or takes final administrative action on a proposed housing development project application and the application is disapproved, including any required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the issuance of a building permit.(B)Fails to comply with the time periods specified in subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph.(C)Fails to meet the time limits specified in Section 65913.3.(D)Fails to cease a course of conduct undertaken for an improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increases in the cost of the proposed housing development project, that effectively disapproves the proposed housing development without taking final administrative action if all of the following conditions are met:(i)The project applicant provides written notice detailing the challenged conduct and why it constitutes disapproval to the local agency established under Section 65100.(ii)Within five working days of receiving the applicants written notice described in clause (i), the local agency shall post the notice on the local agencys internet website, provide a copy of the notice to any person who has made a written request for notices pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 21167 of the Public Resources Code, and file the notice with the county clerk of each county in which the project will be located. The county clerk shall post the notice and make it available for public inspection in the manner set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code.(iii)The local agency shall consider all objections, comments, evidence, and concerns about the project or the applicants written notice and shall not make a determination until at least 60 days after the applicant has given written notice to the local agency pursuant to clause (i).(iv)Within 90 days of receipt of the applicants written notice described in clause (i), the local agency shall issue a written statement that it will immediately cease the challenged conduct or issue written findings that comply with both of the following requirements:(I)The findings articulate an objective basis for why the challenged course of conduct is necessary.(II)The findings provide clear instructions on what the applicant must submit or supplement so that the local agency can make a final determination regarding the next necessary approval or set the date and time of the next hearing.(v)(I)If a local agency continues the challenged course of conduct described in the applicants written notice and fails to issue the written findings described in clause (iv), the local agency shall bear the burden of establishing that its course of conduct does not constitute a disapproval of the housing development project under this subparagraph in an action taken by the applicant.(II)If an applicant challenges a local agencys course of conduct as a disapproval under this subparagraph, the local agencys written findings described in clause (iv) shall be incorporated into the administrative record and be deemed to be the final administrative action for purposes of adjudicating whether the local agencys course of conduct constitutes a disapproval of the housing development project under this subparagraph.(vi)A local agencys action in furtherance of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), including, but not limited to, imposing mitigating measures, shall not constitute project disapproval under this subparagraph.(E)Fails to comply with Section 65905.5. For purposes of this subparagraph, a builders remedy project shall be deemed to comply with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards in effect at the time an application is deemed complete.(F)(i)Determines that an application for a housing development project is incomplete pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 65943 and includes in the determination an item that is not required on the local agencys submittal requirement checklist. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof that the required item is listed on the submittal requirement checklist.(ii)In a subsequent review of an application pursuant to Section 65943, requests the applicant provide new information that was not identified in the initial determination and upholds this determination in the final written determination on an appeal filed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65943. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof that the required item was identified in the initial determination.(iii)Determines that an application for a housing development project is incomplete pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 65943, a reasonable person would conclude that the applicant has submitted all of the items required on the local agencys submittal requirement checklist, and the local agency upholds this determination in the final written determination on an appeal filed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65943.(iv)If a local agency determines that an application is incomplete under Section 65943 after two resubmittals of the application by the applicant, the local agency shall bear the burden of establishing that the determination is not an effective disapproval of a housing development project under this section.(G)Violates subparagraph (D) or (E) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (f).(H)Makes a written determination that a preliminary application described in subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 has expired or that the applicant has otherwise lost its vested rights under the preliminary application for any reason other than those described in subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 65941.1.(I)(i)Fails to make a determination of whether the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), or commits an abuse of discretion, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.1 if all of the conditions in Section 65589.5.1 are satisfied.(ii)This subparagraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(J)(i)Fails to adopt a negative declaration or addendum for the project, to certify an environmental impact report for the project, or to approve another comparable environmental document, such as a sustainable communities environmental assessment pursuant to Section 21155.2 of the Public Resources Code, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), if all of the conditions in Section 65589.5.2 are satisfied.(ii)This subparagraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(7)(A)For purposes of this section and Sections 65589.5.1 and 65589.5.2, lawful determination means any final decision about whether to approve or disapprove a statutory or categorical exemption or a negative declaration, addendum, environmental impact report, or comparable environmental review document under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) that is not an abuse of discretion, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.1 or subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.2.(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(8)Lower density includes any conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing.(9)Until January 1, 2030, objective means involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.(10)Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2030, determined to be complete means that the applicant has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943.(11)Builders remedy project means a project that meets all of the following criteria:(A)The project is a housing development project that provides housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households.(B)On or after the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have a housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article.(C)The project has a density such that the number of units, as calculated before the application of a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915, complies with all of the following conditions:(i)The density does not exceed the greatest of the following densities:(I)Fifty percent greater than the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction as specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2.(II)Three times the density allowed by the general plan, zoning ordinance, or state law, whichever is greater.(III)The density that is consistent with the density specified in the housing element.(ii)Notwithstanding clause (i), the greatest allowable density shall be 35 units per acre more than the amount allowable pursuant to clause (i), if any portion of the site is located within any of the following:(I)One-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.(II)A very low vehicle travel area, as defined in subdivision (h).(III)A high or highest resource census tract, as identified by the latest edition of the CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Map published by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee and the Department of Housing and Community Development.(D)(i)On sites that have a minimum density requirement and are located within one-half mile of a commuter rail station or a heavy rail station, the density of the project shall not be less than the minimum density required on the site.(I)For purposes of this subparagraph, commuter rail means a railway that is not a light rail, streetcar, trolley, or tramway and that is for urban passenger train service consisting of local short distance travel operating between a central city and adjacent suburb with service operated on a regular basis by or under contract with a transit operator for the purpose of transporting passengers within urbanized areas, or between urbanized areas and outlying areas, using either locomotive-hauled or self-propelled railroad passenger cars, with multitrip tickets and specific station-to-station fares.(II)For purposes of this subparagraph, heavy rail means an electric railway with the capacity for a heavy volume of traffic using high speed and rapid acceleration passenger rail cars operating singly or in multicar trains on fixed rails, separate rights-of-way from which all other vehicular and foot traffic are excluded, and high platform loading.(ii)On all other sites with a minimum density requirement, the density of the project shall not be less than the local agencys minimum density or one-half of the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction as specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, whichever is lower.(E)The project site does not abut a site where more than one-third of the square footage on the site has been used, within the past three years, by a heavy industrial use, or a Title V industrial use, as those terms are defined in Section 65913.16.(12)Condition approval includes imposing on the housing development project, or attempting to subject it to, development standards, conditions, or policies.(13)Unit type means the form of ownership and the kind of residential unit, including, but not limited to, single-family detached, single-family attached, for-sale, rental, multifamily, townhouse, condominium, apartment, manufactured homes and mobilehomes, factory-built housing, and residential hotel.(14)Proposed by the applicant means the plans and designs as submitted by the applicant, including, but not limited to, density, unit size, unit type, site plan, building massing, floor area ratio, amenity areas, open space, parking, and ancillary commercial uses.(i)If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in force at the time the housing development projects application is complete, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability or affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, and the denial of the development or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as described in subdivision (d), and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, and with the requirements of subdivision (o).(j)(1)When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist:(A)The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a specific, adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.(B)There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.(2)(A)If the local agency considers a proposed housing development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity as follows:(i)Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains 150 or fewer housing units.(ii)Within 60 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains more than 150 units.(B)If the local agency fails to provide the required documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision.(3)For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or reduction of development standards pursuant to Section 65915 shall not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision.(4)For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project.(k)(1)(A)(i)The applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the housing development project or emergency shelter, or a housing organization may bring an action to enforce this section. If, in any action brought to enforce this section, a court finds that any of the following are met, the court shall issue an order pursuant to clause (ii):(I)The local agency, in violation of subdivision (d), disapproved a housing development project or conditioned its approval in a manner rendering it infeasible for the development of an emergency shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, including farmworker housing, without making the findings required by this section.(II)The local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved a housing development project complying with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without making the findings required by this section.(III)(ia)Subject to sub-subclause (ib), the local agency, in violation of subdivision (o), required or attempted to require a housing development project to comply with an ordinance, policy, or standard not adopted and in effect when a preliminary application was submitted.(ib)This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2030.(IV)The local agency violated a provision of this section applicable to a builders remedy project.(ii)If the court finds that one of the conditions in clause (i) is met, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within a time period not to exceed 60 days, including, but not limited to, an order that the local agency take action on the housing development project or emergency shelter. The court may issue an order or judgment directing the local agency to approve the housing development project or emergency shelter if the court finds that the local agency acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this section. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out and shall award reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or petitioner, provided, however, that the court shall not award attorneys fees in either of the following instances:(I)The court finds, under extraordinary circumstances, that awarding fees would not further the purposes of this section.(II)(ia)In a case concerning a disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (I) or (J) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h), the court finds that the local agency acted in good faith and had reasonable cause to disapprove the housing development project due to the existence of a controlling question of law about the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) or implementing guidelines as to which there was a substantial ground for difference of opinion at the time of the disapproval.(ib)This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(B)Upon a determination that the local agency has failed to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within the time period prescribed by the court, the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per housing unit in the housing development project on the date the application was deemed complete pursuant to Section 65943. In determining the amount of the fine to impose, the court shall consider the local agencys progress in attaining its target allocation of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584 and any prior violations of this section. Fines shall not be paid out of funds already dedicated to affordable housing, including, but not limited to, Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing for very low, low-, and moderate-income households, and federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community Development Block Grant Program funds. The local agency shall commit and expend the money in the local housing trust fund within five years for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households. After five years, if the funds have not been expended, the money shall revert to the state and be deposited in the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households.(C)If the court determines that its order or judgment has not been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing development project, in which case the application for the housing development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant consents to a different decision or action by the local agency.(D)Nothing in this section shall limit the courts inherent authority to make any other orders to compel the immediate enforcement of any writ brought under this section, including the imposition of fees and other sanctions set forth under Section 1097 of the Code of Civil Procedure.(2)For purposes of this subdivision, housing organization means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or advocating for increased access to housing for low-income households and have filed written or oral comments with the local agency prior to action on the housing development project. A housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in an action to enforce this section.(l)If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith when it violated this section and (2) failed to carry out the courts order or judgment within the time period prescribed by the court, the court, in addition to any other remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) by a factor of five. If a court has previously found that the local agency violated this section within the same planning period, the court shall multiply the fines by an additional factor for each previous violation. For purposes of this section, bad faith includes, but is not limited to, an action or inaction that is frivolous, pretextual, intended to cause unnecessary delay, or entirely without merit.(m)(1)Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section. A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on, disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry of the trial courts order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff is the project applicant.(2)(A)A disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (I) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) shall be final for purposes of this subdivision, if the local agency did not make a lawful determination within the time period set forth in paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.1 after the applicants timely written notice.(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(3)(A)A disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (J) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) shall be final for purposes of this subdivision, if the local agency did not make a lawful determination within 90 days of the applicants timely written notice.(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(n)In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and, notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioners points and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondents points and authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs.(o)(1)Subject to paragraphs (2), (6), and (7), and subdivision (d) of Section 65941.1, a housing development project shall be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application including all of the information required by subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 was submitted.(2)Paragraph (1) shall not prohibit a housing development project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards adopted after the preliminary application was submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 in the following circumstances:(A)In the case of a fee, charge, or other monetary exaction, to an increase resulting from an automatic annual adjustment based on an independently published cost index that is referenced in the ordinance or resolution establishing the fee or other monetary exaction.(B)A preponderance of the evidence in the record establishes that subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, or standard beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to mitigate or avoid a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), and there is no feasible alternative method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.(C)Subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, standard, or any other measure, beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to avoid or substantially lessen an impact of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).(D)The housing development project has not commenced construction within two and one-half years, or three and one-half years for an affordable housing project, following the date that the project received final approval. For purposes of this subparagraph:(i)Affordable housing project means a housing development that satisfies both of the following requirements:(I)Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing, or the first purchaser of each unit participates in an equity sharing agreement as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 65915.(II)All of the units within the development, excluding managers units, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.(ii)Final approval means that the housing development project has received all necessary approvals to be eligible to apply for, and obtain, a building permit or permits and either of the following is met:(I)The expiration of all applicable appeal periods, petition periods, reconsideration periods, or statute of limitations for challenging that final approval without an appeal, petition, request for reconsideration, or legal challenge having been filed.(II)If a challenge is filed, that challenge is fully resolved or settled in favor of the housing development project.(E)The housing development project is revised following submittal of a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, including any other locally authorized program that offers additional density or other development bonuses when affordable housing is provided. For purposes of this subdivision, square footage of construction means the building area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations).(3)This subdivision does not prevent a local agency from subjecting the additional units or square footage of construction that result from project revisions occurring after a preliminary application is submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when the preliminary application was submitted.(4)For purposes of this subdivision, ordinances, policies, and standards includes general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and policies of a local agency, as defined in Section 66000, including those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions.(5)This subdivision shall not be construed in a manner that would lessen the restrictions imposed on a local agency, or lessen the protections afforded to a housing development project, that are established by any other law, including any other part of this section.(6)This subdivision shall not restrict the authority of a public agency or local agency to require mitigation measures to lessen the impacts of a housing development project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).(7)With respect to completed residential units for which the project approval process is complete and a certificate of occupancy has been issued, nothing in this subdivision shall limit the application of later enacted ordinances, policies, and standards that regulate the use and occupancy of those residential units, such as ordinances relating to rental housing inspection, rent stabilization, restrictions on short-term renting, and business licensing requirements for owners of rental housing.(8)(A)This subdivision shall apply to a housing development project that submits a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 before January 1, 2030.(B)This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, 2034.(p)(1)Upon any motion for an award of attorneys fees pursuant to Section 1021.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in a case challenging a local agencys approval of a housing development project, a court, in weighing whether a significant benefit has been conferred on the general public or a large class of persons and whether the necessity of private enforcement makes the award appropriate, shall give due weight to the degree to which the local agencys approval furthers policies of this section, including, but not limited to, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), the suitability of the site for a housing development, and the reasonableness of the decision of the local agency. It is the intent of the Legislature that attorneys fees and costs shall rarely, if ever, be awarded if a local agency, acting in good faith, approved a housing development project that satisfies conditions established in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.1 or paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.2.(2)This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.(q)This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Housing Accountability Act.(r)The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.(a)(1)The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(A)The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California.
(B)California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the states housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing.
(C)Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.
(D)Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.
(2)In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares the following:
(A)California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the states environmental and climate objectives.
(B)While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable to Californians of all income levels is a key factor.
(C)The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted unaffordability.
(D)According to reports and data, California has accumulated an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with growth through 2025.
(E)Californias overall home ownership rate is at its lowest level since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in home ownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. Only one-half of Californias households are able to afford the cost of housing in their local regions.
(F)Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians.
(G)The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more than 50 percent of their income toward rent.
(H)When Californians have access to safe and affordable housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are less likely to become homeless and in need of government-subsidized services; their children do better in school; and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining employees.
(I)An additional consequence of the states cumulative housing shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and middle-class households. Californias cumulative housing shortfall therefore has not only national but international environmental consequences.
(J)Californias housing picture has reached a crisis of historic proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income levels, including this section.
(K)The Legislatures intent in enacting this section in 1982 and in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase the approval and construction of new housing for all economic segments of Californias communities by meaningfully and effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled.
(L)It is the policy of the state that this section be interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing.
(3)It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently.
(4)It is the intent of the Legislature that the amendments removing provisions from subparagraphs (D) and (E) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) and adding those provisions to Sections 65589.5.1 and 65589.5.2 by Assembly Bill 1413 (2023), insofar as they are substantially the same as existing law, shall be considered restatements and continuations of existing law, and not new enactments.
(b)It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject or make infeasible housing development projects, including emergency shelters, that contribute to meeting the need determined pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action and without complying with subdivision (d).
(c)The Legislature also recognizes that premature and unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas.
(d)For a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, or for an emergency shelter, a local agency shall not disapprove the housing development project or emergency shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing development project or emergency shelter infeasible, including through the use of design review standards, unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following:
(1)The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588, is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for the income category proposed for the housing development project, provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the housing development project includes a mix of income categories, and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need for one or more of those categories, then this paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve the housing development project. The share of the regional housing need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards.
(2)The housing development project or emergency shelter as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a specific, adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. The following shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety:
(A)Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation.
(B)The eligibility to claim a welfare exemption under subdivision (g) of Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
(3)The denial of the housing development project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible.
(4)The housing development project or emergency shelter is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project.
(5)On the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction had adopted a revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article, and the housing development project or emergency shelter was inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan.
(A)This paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing development project proposed on a site, including a candidate site for rezoning, that is identified as suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income households in the jurisdictions housing element if the housing development project is consistent with the density specified in the housing element, even though the housing development project was inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation on the date the application was deemed complete.
(B)If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.
(6)On the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have an adopted revised housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article and the housing development project is not a builders remedy project.
(e)Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the congestion management program required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
(f)(1)Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (8) of this subdivision, and subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring the housing development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdictions share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density permitted on the site and proposed by the development. Nothing in this section shall limit a projects eligibility for a density bonus, incentive, or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915.
(2)Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring an emergency shelter project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that are consistent with paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdictions need for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. However, the development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied by the local agency to facilitate and accommodate the development of the emergency shelter project.
(3)Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from imposing fees and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the housing development project or emergency shelter.
(4)For purposes of this section, 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.
(5)For purposes of this section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or condition approval of the housing development project or emergency shelter.
(6)Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, all of the following apply to a housing development project that is a builders remedy project:
(A)A local agency may only require the project to comply with the objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that would have applied to the project had it been proposed on a site with a general plan designation and zoning classification that allow the density and unit type proposed by the applicant. If the local agency has no general plan designation or zoning classification that would have allowed the density and unit type proposed by the applicant, the development proponent may identify any objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies associated with a different general plan designation or zoning classification within that jurisdiction, that facilitate the projects density and unit type, and those shall apply.
(B)(i)Except as authorized by paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (d), a local agency shall not apply any individual or combination of objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies to the project that do any of the following:
(I)Render the project infeasible.
(II)Preclude a project that meets the requirements allowed to be imposed by subparagraph (A), as modified by any density bonus, incentive, or concession, or waiver or reduction of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915, from being constructed as proposed by the applicant.
(ii)The local agency shall bear the burden of proof of complying with clause (i).
(C)(i)A project applicant that qualifies for a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915 shall receive two incentives or concessions in addition to those granted pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65915.
(ii)For a project seeking density bonuses, incentives, concessions, or any other benefits pursuant to Section 65915, and notwithstanding paragraph (6) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, for purposes of this paragraph, maximum allowable residential density or base density means the density permitted for a builders remedy project pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h).
(iii)A local agency shall grant any density bonus pursuant to Section 65915 based on the number of units proposed and allowable pursuant to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h).
(iv)A project that dedicates units to extremely low-income households pursuant to subclause (I) of clause (i) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (h) shall be eligible for the same density bonus, incentives or concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards as provided to a housing development project that dedicates three percentage points more units to very low income households pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (f) of Section 65915.
(v)All units dedicated to extremely low-income, very low income, low-income, and moderate-income households pursuant to paragraph (11) of subdivision (h) shall be counted as affordable units in determining whether the applicant qualifies for a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915.
(D)(i)The project shall not be required to apply for, or receive approval of, a general plan amendment, specific plan amendment, rezoning, or other legislative approval.
(ii)The project shall not be required to apply for, or receive, any approval or permit not generally required of a project of the same type and density proposed by the applicant.
(iii)Any project that complies with this paragraph shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, redevelopment plan and implementing instruments, or other similar provision for all purposes, and shall not be considered or treated as a nonconforming lot, use, or structure for any purpose.
(E)A local agency shall not adopt or impose any requirement, process, practice, or procedure or undertake any course of conduct, including, but not limited to, increased fees or inclusionary housing requirements, that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project is a builders remedy project.
(F)(i)A builders remedy project shall be deemed to be in compliance with the residential density standards for the purposes of complying with subdivision (b) of Section 65912.123.
(ii)A builders remedy project shall be deemed to be in compliance with the objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards for the purposes of complying with paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4.
(G)(i)(I)If the local agency had a local affordable housing requirement, as defined in Section 65912.101, that on January 1, 2024, required a greater percentage of affordable units than required under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h), or required an affordability level deeper than what is required under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (h), then, except as provided in subclauses (II) and (III), the local agency may require a housing development for mixed-income households to comply with an otherwise lawfully applicable local affordability percentage or affordability level. The local agency shall not require housing for mixed-income households to comply with any other aspect of the local affordable housing requirement.
(II)Notwithstanding subclause (I), the local affordable housing requirements shall not be applied to require housing for mixed-income households to dedicate more than 20 percent of the units to affordable units of any kind.
(III)Housing for mixed-income households that is required to dedicate 20 percent of the units to affordable units shall not be required to dedicate any of the affordable units at an income level deeper than lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(IV)A local agency may only require housing for mixed-income households to comply with the local percentage requirement or affordability level described in subclause (I) if it first makes written findings, supported by a preponderance of evidence, that compliance with the local percentage requirement or the affordability level, or both, would not render the housing development project infeasible. If a reasonable person could find compliance with either requirement, either alone or in combination, would render the project infeasible, the project shall not be required to comply with that requirement.
(ii)Affordable units in the development project shall have a comparable bedroom and bathroom count as the market rate units.
(iii)Each affordable unit dedicated pursuant to this subparagraph shall count toward satisfying a local affordable housing requirement. Each affordable unit dedicated pursuant to a local affordable housing requirement that meets the criteria established in this subparagraph shall count towards satisfying the requirements of this subparagraph. This is declaratory of existing law.
(7)(A)For a housing development project application that is deemed complete before January 1, 2025, the development proponent for the project may choose to be subject to the provisions of this section that were in place on the date the preliminary application was submitted, or, if the project meets the definition of a builders remedy project, it may choose to be subject to any or all of the provisions of this section applicable as of January 1, 2025.
(B)Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 65941.1, for a housing development project deemed complete before January 1, 2025, the development proponent may choose to revise their application so that the project is a builders remedy project, without being required to resubmit a preliminary application, even if the revision results in the number of residential units or square footage of construction changing by 20 percent or more.
(8)A housing development project proposed on a site that is identified as suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income households in the jurisdictions housing element, that is consistent with the density specified in the most recently updated and adopted housing element, and that is inconsistent with both the jurisdictions zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation on the date the application was deemed complete, shall be subject to the provisions of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (D) of paragraph (6) and paragraph (9).
(9)For purposes of this subdivision, objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies means criteria that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal, including, but not limited to, any standard, ordinance, or policy described in paragraph (4) of subdivision (o). Nothing herein shall affect the obligation of the housing development project to comply with the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code. In the event that applicable objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies are mutually inconsistent, a development shall be deemed consistent with the criteria that permits the density and unit type closest to that of the proposed project.
(g)This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency shelter, is a critical statewide problem.
(h)The following definitions apply for the purposes of this section:
(1)Feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.
(2)Housing development project means a use consisting of any of the following:
(A)Residential units only.
(B)Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses that meet any of the following conditions:
(i)At least two-thirds of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use.
(ii)At least 50 percent of the new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets both of the following:
(I)The project includes at least 500 net new residential units.
(II)No portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except a portion of the project may be designated for use as a residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code.
(iii)At least 50 percent of the net new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets all of the following:
(I)The project includes at least 500 net new residential units.
(II)The project involves the demolition or conversion of at least 100,000 square feet of nonresidential use.
(III)The project demolishes at least 50 percent of the existing nonresidential uses on the site.
(IV)No portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging, except a portion of the project may be designated for use as a residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C)Transitional housing or supportive housing.
(D)Farmworker housing, as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code.
(3)(A)Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households means housing for lower income households, mixed-income households, or moderate-income households.
(B)Housing for lower income households means a housing development project in which 100 percent of the units, excluding managers units, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, at an affordable cost, as defined by Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent set in an amount consistent with the rent limits established by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. The units shall be subject to a recorded deed restriction for a period of 55 years for rental units and 45 years for owner-occupied units.
(C)(i)Housing for mixed-income households means any of the following:
(I)A housing development project in which at least 7 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to extremely low income households, as defined in Section 50106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(II)A housing development project in which at least 10 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to very low income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(III)A housing development project in which at least 13 percent of the total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(IV)A housing development project in which there are 10 or fewer total units, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8) of subdivision (o) of Section 65915, that is on a site that is smaller than one acre, and that is proposed for development at a minimum density of 10 units per acre.
(ii)All units dedicated to extremely low income, very low income, and low-income households pursuant to clause (i) shall meet both of the following:
(I)The units shall have an affordable housing cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
(II)The development proponent shall agree to, and the local agency shall ensure, the continued affordability of all affordable rental units included pursuant to this section for 55 years and all affordable ownership units included pursuant to this section for a period of 45 years.
(D)Housing for moderate-income households means a housing development project in which 100 percent of the units are sold or rented to moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, at an affordable housing cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or an affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code. The units shall be subject to a recorded deed restriction for a period of 55 years for rental units and 45 years for owner-occupied units.
(4)Area median income means area median income as periodically established by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code.
(5)Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2030, deemed complete means that the applicant has submitted a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 or, if the applicant has not submitted a preliminary application, has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that the application is not complete.
(6)Disapprove the housing development project includes any instance in which a local agency does any of the following:
(A)Votes or takes final administrative action on a proposed housing development project application and the application is disapproved, including any required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the issuance of a building permit.
(B)Fails to comply with the time periods specified in subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph.
(C)Fails to meet the time limits specified in Section 65913.3.
(D)Fails to cease a course of conduct undertaken for an improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increases in the cost of the proposed housing development project, that effectively disapproves the proposed housing development without taking final administrative action if all of the following conditions are met:
(i)The project applicant provides written notice detailing the challenged conduct and why it constitutes disapproval to the local agency established under Section 65100.
(ii)Within five working days of receiving the applicants written notice described in clause (i), the local agency shall post the notice on the local agencys internet website, provide a copy of the notice to any person who has made a written request for notices pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 21167 of the Public Resources Code, and file the notice with the county clerk of each county in which the project will be located. The county clerk shall post the notice and make it available for public inspection in the manner set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
(iii)The local agency shall consider all objections, comments, evidence, and concerns about the project or the applicants written notice and shall not make a determination until at least 60 days after the applicant has given written notice to the local agency pursuant to clause (i).
(iv)Within 90 days of receipt of the applicants written notice described in clause (i), the local agency shall issue a written statement that it will immediately cease the challenged conduct or issue written findings that comply with both of the following requirements:
(I)The findings articulate an objective basis for why the challenged course of conduct is necessary.
(II)The findings provide clear instructions on what the applicant must submit or supplement so that the local agency can make a final determination regarding the next necessary approval or set the date and time of the next hearing.
(v)(I)If a local agency continues the challenged course of conduct described in the applicants written notice and fails to issue the written findings described in clause (iv), the local agency shall bear the burden of establishing that its course of conduct does not constitute a disapproval of the housing development project under this subparagraph in an action taken by the applicant.
(II)If an applicant challenges a local agencys course of conduct as a disapproval under this subparagraph, the local agencys written findings described in clause (iv) shall be incorporated into the administrative record and be deemed to be the final administrative action for purposes of adjudicating whether the local agencys course of conduct constitutes a disapproval of the housing development project under this subparagraph.
(vi)A local agencys action in furtherance of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), including, but not limited to, imposing mitigating measures, shall not constitute project disapproval under this subparagraph.
(E)Fails to comply with Section 65905.5. For purposes of this subparagraph, a builders remedy project shall be deemed to comply with the applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards in effect at the time an application is deemed complete.
(F)(i)Determines that an application for a housing development project is incomplete pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 65943 and includes in the determination an item that is not required on the local agencys submittal requirement checklist. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof that the required item is listed on the submittal requirement checklist.
(ii)In a subsequent review of an application pursuant to Section 65943, requests the applicant provide new information that was not identified in the initial determination and upholds this determination in the final written determination on an appeal filed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65943. The local agency shall bear the burden of proof that the required item was identified in the initial determination.
(iii)Determines that an application for a housing development project is incomplete pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 65943, a reasonable person would conclude that the applicant has submitted all of the items required on the local agencys submittal requirement checklist, and the local agency upholds this determination in the final written determination on an appeal filed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65943.
(iv)If a local agency determines that an application is incomplete under Section 65943 after two resubmittals of the application by the applicant, the local agency shall bear the burden of establishing that the determination is not an effective disapproval of a housing development project under this section.
(G)Violates subparagraph (D) or (E) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (f).
(H)Makes a written determination that a preliminary application described in subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 has expired or that the applicant has otherwise lost its vested rights under the preliminary application for any reason other than those described in subdivisions (c) and (d) of Section 65941.1.
(I)(i)Fails to make a determination of whether the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), or commits an abuse of discretion, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.1 if all of the conditions in Section 65589.5.1 are satisfied.
(ii)This subparagraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(J)(i)Fails to adopt a negative declaration or addendum for the project, to certify an environmental impact report for the project, or to approve another comparable environmental document, such as a sustainable communities environmental assessment pursuant to Section 21155.2 of the Public Resources Code, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code), if all of the conditions in Section 65589.5.2 are satisfied.
(ii)This subparagraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(7)(A)For purposes of this section and Sections 65589.5.1 and 65589.5.2, lawful determination means any final decision about whether to approve or disapprove a statutory or categorical exemption or a negative declaration, addendum, environmental impact report, or comparable environmental review document under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) that is not an abuse of discretion, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.1 or subdivision (b) of Section 65589.5.2.
(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(8)Lower density includes any conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing.
(9)Until January 1, 2030, objective means involving no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.
(10)Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2030, determined to be complete means that the applicant has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943.
(11)Builders remedy project means a project that meets all of the following criteria:
(A)The project is a housing development project that provides housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households.
(B)On or after the date an application for the housing development project or emergency shelter was deemed complete, the jurisdiction did not have a housing element that was in substantial compliance with this article.
(C)The project has a density such that the number of units, as calculated before the application of a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915, complies with all of the following conditions:
(i)The density does not exceed the greatest of the following densities:
(I)Fifty percent greater than the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction as specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2.
(II)Three times the density allowed by the general plan, zoning ordinance, or state law, whichever is greater.
(III)The density that is consistent with the density specified in the housing element.
(ii)Notwithstanding clause (i), the greatest allowable density shall be 35 units per acre more than the amount allowable pursuant to clause (i), if any portion of the site is located within any of the following:
(I)One-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.
(II)A very low vehicle travel area, as defined in subdivision (h).
(III)A high or highest resource census tract, as identified by the latest edition of the CTCAC/HCD Opportunity Map published by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee and the Department of Housing and Community Development.
(D)(i)On sites that have a minimum density requirement and are located within one-half mile of a commuter rail station or a heavy rail station, the density of the project shall not be less than the minimum density required on the site.
(I)For purposes of this subparagraph, commuter rail means a railway that is not a light rail, streetcar, trolley, or tramway and that is for urban passenger train service consisting of local short distance travel operating between a central city and adjacent suburb with service operated on a regular basis by or under contract with a transit operator for the purpose of transporting passengers within urbanized areas, or between urbanized areas and outlying areas, using either locomotive-hauled or self-propelled railroad passenger cars, with multitrip tickets and specific station-to-station fares.
(II)For purposes of this subparagraph, heavy rail means an electric railway with the capacity for a heavy volume of traffic using high speed and rapid acceleration passenger rail cars operating singly or in multicar trains on fixed rails, separate rights-of-way from which all other vehicular and foot traffic are excluded, and high platform loading.
(ii)On all other sites with a minimum density requirement, the density of the project shall not be less than the local agencys minimum density or one-half of the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction as specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2, whichever is lower.
(E)The project site does not abut a site where more than one-third of the square footage on the site has been used, within the past three years, by a heavy industrial use, or a Title V industrial use, as those terms are defined in Section 65913.16.
(12)Condition approval includes imposing on the housing development project, or attempting to subject it to, development standards, conditions, or policies.
(13)Unit type means the form of ownership and the kind of residential unit, including, but not limited to, single-family detached, single-family attached, for-sale, rental, multifamily, townhouse, condominium, apartment, manufactured homes and mobilehomes, factory-built housing, and residential hotel.
(14)Proposed by the applicant means the plans and designs as submitted by the applicant, including, but not limited to, density, unit size, unit type, site plan, building massing, floor area ratio, amenity areas, open space, parking, and ancillary commercial uses.
(i)If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in force at the time the housing development projects application is complete, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability or affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, and the denial of the development or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as described in subdivision (d), and that the findings are supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, and with the requirements of subdivision (o).
(j)(1)When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist:
(A)The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a specific, adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
(B)There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.
(2)(A)If the local agency considers a proposed housing development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity as follows:
(i)Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains 150 or fewer housing units.
(ii)Within 60 days of the date that the application for the housing development project is determined to be complete, if the housing development project contains more than 150 units.
(B)If the local agency fails to provide the required documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision.
(3)For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or reduction of development standards pursuant to Section 65915 shall not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision.
(4)For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project.
(k)(1)(A)(i)The applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the housing development project or emergency shelter, or a housing organization may bring an action to enforce this section. If, in any action brought to enforce this section, a court finds that any of the following are met, the court shall issue an order pursuant to clause (ii):
(I)The local agency, in violation of subdivision (d), disapproved a housing development project or conditioned its approval in a manner rendering it infeasible for the development of an emergency shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households, including farmworker housing, without making the findings required by this section.
(II)The local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved a housing development project complying with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without making the findings required by this section.
(III)(ia)Subject to sub-subclause (ib), the local agency, in violation of subdivision (o), required or attempted to require a housing development project to comply with an ordinance, policy, or standard not adopted and in effect when a preliminary application was submitted.
(ib)This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2030.
(IV)The local agency violated a provision of this section applicable to a builders remedy project.
(ii)If the court finds that one of the conditions in clause (i) is met, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within a time period not to exceed 60 days, including, but not limited to, an order that the local agency take action on the housing development project or emergency shelter. The court may issue an order or judgment directing the local agency to approve the housing development project or emergency shelter if the court finds that the local agency acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this section. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out and shall award reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or petitioner, provided, however, that the court shall not award attorneys fees in either of the following instances:
(I)The court finds, under extraordinary circumstances, that awarding fees would not further the purposes of this section.
(II)(ia)In a case concerning a disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (I) or (J) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h), the court finds that the local agency acted in good faith and had reasonable cause to disapprove the housing development project due to the existence of a controlling question of law about the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) or implementing guidelines as to which there was a substantial ground for difference of opinion at the time of the disapproval.
(ib)This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(B)Upon a determination that the local agency has failed to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within the time period prescribed by the court, the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per housing unit in the housing development project on the date the application was deemed complete pursuant to Section 65943. In determining the amount of the fine to impose, the court shall consider the local agencys progress in attaining its target allocation of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584 and any prior violations of this section. Fines shall not be paid out of funds already dedicated to affordable housing, including, but not limited to, Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing for very low, low-, and moderate-income households, and federal HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community Development Block Grant Program funds. The local agency shall commit and expend the money in the local housing trust fund within five years for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households. After five years, if the funds have not been expended, the money shall revert to the state and be deposited in the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund for the sole purpose of financing newly constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, or low-income households.
(C)If the court determines that its order or judgment has not been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing development project, in which case the application for the housing development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant consents to a different decision or action by the local agency.
(D)Nothing in this section shall limit the courts inherent authority to make any other orders to compel the immediate enforcement of any writ brought under this section, including the imposition of fees and other sanctions set forth under Section 1097 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2)For purposes of this subdivision, housing organization means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or advocating for increased access to housing for low-income households and have filed written or oral comments with the local agency prior to action on the housing development project. A housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in an action to enforce this section.
(l)If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith when it violated this section and (2) failed to carry out the courts order or judgment within the time period prescribed by the court, the court, in addition to any other remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (k) by a factor of five. If a court has previously found that the local agency violated this section within the same planning period, the court shall multiply the fines by an additional factor for each previous violation. For purposes of this section, bad faith includes, but is not limited to, an action or inaction that is frivolous, pretextual, intended to cause unnecessary delay, or entirely without merit.
(m)(1)Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section. A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on, disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry of the trial courts order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff is the project applicant.
(2)(A)A disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (I) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) shall be final for purposes of this subdivision, if the local agency did not make a lawful determination within the time period set forth in paragraph (5) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.1 after the applicants timely written notice.
(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(3)(A)A disapproval within the meaning of subparagraph (J) of paragraph (6) of subdivision (h) shall be final for purposes of this subdivision, if the local agency did not make a lawful determination within 90 days of the applicants timely written notice.
(B)This paragraph shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(n)In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and, notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioners points and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondents points and authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs.
(o)(1)Subject to paragraphs (2), (6), and (7), and subdivision (d) of Section 65941.1, a housing development project shall be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application including all of the information required by subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 was submitted.
(2)Paragraph (1) shall not prohibit a housing development project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards adopted after the preliminary application was submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 in the following circumstances:
(A)In the case of a fee, charge, or other monetary exaction, to an increase resulting from an automatic annual adjustment based on an independently published cost index that is referenced in the ordinance or resolution establishing the fee or other monetary exaction.
(B)A preponderance of the evidence in the record establishes that subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, or standard beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to mitigate or avoid a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), and there is no feasible alternative method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.
(C)Subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, policy, standard, or any other measure, beyond those in effect when a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to avoid or substantially lessen an impact of the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
(D)The housing development project has not commenced construction within two and one-half years, or three and one-half years for an affordable housing project, following the date that the project received final approval. For purposes of this subparagraph:
(i)Affordable housing project means a housing development that satisfies both of the following requirements:
(I)Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing, or the first purchaser of each unit participates in an equity sharing agreement as described in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 65915.
(II)All of the units within the development, excluding managers units, are dedicated to lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(ii)Final approval means that the housing development project has received all necessary approvals to be eligible to apply for, and obtain, a building permit or permits and either of the following is met:
(I)The expiration of all applicable appeal periods, petition periods, reconsideration periods, or statute of limitations for challenging that final approval without an appeal, petition, request for reconsideration, or legal challenge having been filed.
(II)If a challenge is filed, that challenge is fully resolved or settled in favor of the housing development project.
(E)The housing development project is revised following submittal of a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, including any other locally authorized program that offers additional density or other development bonuses when affordable housing is provided. For purposes of this subdivision, square footage of construction means the building area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations).
(3)This subdivision does not prevent a local agency from subjecting the additional units or square footage of construction that result from project revisions occurring after a preliminary application is submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when the preliminary application was submitted.
(4)For purposes of this subdivision, ordinances, policies, and standards includes general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and policies of a local agency, as defined in Section 66000, including those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions.
(5)This subdivision shall not be construed in a manner that would lessen the restrictions imposed on a local agency, or lessen the protections afforded to a housing development project, that are established by any other law, including any other part of this section.
(6)This subdivision shall not restrict the authority of a public agency or local agency to require mitigation measures to lessen the impacts of a housing development project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
(7)With respect to completed residential units for which the project approval process is complete and a certificate of occupancy has been issued, nothing in this subdivision shall limit the application of later enacted ordinances, policies, and standards that regulate the use and occupancy of those residential units, such as ordinances relating to rental housing inspection, rent stabilization, restrictions on short-term renting, and business licensing requirements for owners of rental housing.
(8)(A)This subdivision shall apply to a housing development project that submits a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 before January 1, 2030.
(B)This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, 2034.
(p)(1)Upon any motion for an award of attorneys fees pursuant to Section 1021.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in a case challenging a local agencys approval of a housing development project, a court, in weighing whether a significant benefit has been conferred on the general public or a large class of persons and whether the necessity of private enforcement makes the award appropriate, shall give due weight to the degree to which the local agencys approval furthers policies of this section, including, but not limited to, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), the suitability of the site for a housing development, and the reasonableness of the decision of the local agency. It is the intent of the Legislature that attorneys fees and costs shall rarely, if ever, be awarded if a local agency, acting in good faith, approved a housing development project that satisfies conditions established in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.1 or paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 65589.5.2.
(2)This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, 2031.
(q)This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Housing Accountability Act.
(r)The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Jun 9, 2025 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| Jun 5, 2025 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 68. Noes 0. Page 2102.) |
| Jun 2, 2025 | Read third time and amended. Ordered to third reading. (Page 1951.) |
| May 6, 2025 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 5, 2025 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| May 1, 2025 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 30). |
| Apr 1, 2025 | Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV. |
| Mar 28, 2025 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 28, 2025 | Referred to Com. on L. GOV. |
| Feb 15, 2025 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 17. |
| Feb 14, 2025 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 5, 2025 | AB 698 Wicks Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Apr 30, 2025 | Do pass as amended. | Assembly Standing Committee on Local Government |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| Abundant Housing LA | ** Support | |
| ACCE | ** Against | |
| ACT -LA | ** Against | |
| Active San Gabriel Valley | ** Against | |
| AFGE Local 1260, AFL-CIO | ** Against | |
| Bay Area Council | ** Support | |
| Beverly-Vermont Community Land Trust | ** Against | |
| Brotherhood Crusade | ** Against | |
| Building Owners and Managers of Greater Los Angeles | ** Support | |
| California Downtown Association | ** Support | |
| California YIMBY | ** Support | |
| Circulate San Diego | ** Support | |
| Communities for a Better Environment | ** Against | |
| Community Power Collective | ** Against | |
| Corporation For Supportive Housing | ** Against | |
| Council of Infill Builders | ** Support | |
| East Bay YIMBY | ** Support | |
| East LA Community Corporation | ** Against | |
| East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice | ** Against | |
| Elevate California | ** Support | |
| Employers Group | ** Support | |
| Esperanza Community Housing | ** Against | |
| Fideicomiso Comunitario Tierra Libre | ** Against | |
| Fusion Community Empowerment | ** Against | |
| Greater Los Angeles Realtors | ** Support | |
| Grow the Richmond | ** Support | |
| Homes & Hope | ** Against | |
| Housing Action Coalition | ** Support | |
| IBEW Local 11 | ** Against | |
| Iron Workers Local 433 | ** Against | |
| kiwa | ** Against | |
| LA Alliance for A New Economy | ** Against | |
| la forward | ** Against | |
| LCLAA Los Angeles | ** Against | |
| Liberty Community Land Trust | ** Against | |
| Liberty Hill Foundation | ** Against | |
| Long Beach Residents Empowered | ** Against | |
| Los Angeles County Federation of Labor | ** Against | |
| Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust | ** Against | |
| Los Angeles/Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council | ** Against | |
| Mountain View YIMBY | ** Support | |
| Move LA | ** Against | |
| Multicultural Business Alliance | ** Support | |
| NAIOP SOCAL CHAPTER | ** Support | |
| Napa-Solano for Everyone | ** Support | |
| Northern Neighbors | ** Support | |
| Peninsula for Everyone | ** Support | |
| Public Advocates | ** Against | |
| Public Counsel | ** Against | |
| Saje | ** Against | |
| Santa Cruz Yimby | ** Support | |
| Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights | ** Against | |
| Santa Rosa Yimby | ** Support | |
| Sf Yimby | ** Support | |
| South Bay Yimby | ** Support | |
| Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing | ** Against | |
| State Building and Construction Trades Council of California | ** Against | |
| T.R.U.S.T. South LA | ** Against | |
| Tenants Together | ** Against | |
| The Two Hundred | ** Support | |
| U.A. Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 761 | ** Against | |
| United to House Los Angeles | ** Against | |
| USC Gould School of Law Housing Law and Policy Clinic | ** Against | |
| Ventura County YIMBY | ** Support | |
| WLCAC Re-entry | ** Against | |
| Yimby Action | ** Support | |
| YIMBY LA | ** Support | |
| Yimby SLO | ** Support |
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 698
Author:(Wicks and Mark González)
As Amended Ver:June 2, 2025
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Requires, before a legislative body adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body to provide an analysis that examines the effect of the proposed tax.
Major Provisions
- Specify that, before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
- The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
- The production of market-rate housing units.
- Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
- Find and declare that (a) property tax receipts are reduced by fewer property sales and a reduction in property tax has a countywide impact, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs. Therefore, this bill applies to all cities, including charter cities.
COMMENTS
Documentary Transfer Taxes. The California Constitution and state statute prohibit transaction taxes or sales taxes on transfers of real property. The DTT Act allows counties to levy a tax upon the recording of documents that transfer interests in real property. All 58 counties impose a DTT, which is levied at a rate of 55 cents per $500 (or 0.11%) of the value of the real property or interest being transferred. The Act allows a city within a county that has adopted a DTT to impose a DTT at one-half of the county rate. The amount of tax paid to a city is a credit against the amount of the tax owed to a county. Most cities levy a DTT pursuant to the Act. Under the "municipal affairs" doctrine established by Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution, some charter cities tax the transfer of ownership of real estate at rates that exceed the statutory limit on the DTT.
Recent Real Estate Transfer Tax Measure. A recent University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) study titled, The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA, released in April 2025, discusses the effect of the passage that Measure ULA has had on higher-end real estate transaction in the City of Los Angeles (L.A.). Measure ULA was placed on the ballot by and approved by L.A. voters in 2022 with a 57.77% vote. Measure ULA went into effect in April 2023. The tax was framed as a "Mansion Tax", and it imposed a real estate transfer tax designed to help L.A.'s housing crisis. The study provides details on how the tax effects certain real estate transactions saying the measure initially applied to real estate transactions over $5 million, and it
Documentary Transfer Taxes. The California Constitution and state statute prohibit transaction taxes or sales taxes on transfers of real property. The DTT Act allows counties to levy a tax upon the recording of documents that transfer interests in real property. All 58 counties impose a DTT, which is levied at a rate of 55 cents per $500 (or 0.11%) of the value of the real property or interest being transferred. The Act allows a city within a county that has adopted a DTT to impose a DTT at one-half of the county rate. The amount of tax paid to a city is a credit against the amount of the tax owed to a county. Most cities levy a DTT pursuant to the Act. Under the "municipal affairs" doctrine established by Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution, some charter cities tax the transfer of ownership of real estate at rates that exceed the statutory limit on the DTT.
Recent Real Estate Transfer Tax Measure. A recent University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) study titled, The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA, released in April 2025, discusses the effect of the passage that Measure ULA has had on higher-end real estate transaction in the City of Los Angeles (L.A.). Measure ULA was placed on the ballot by and approved by L.A. voters in 2022 with a 57.77% vote. Measure ULA went into effect in April 2023. The tax was framed as a "Mansion Tax", and it imposed a real estate transfer tax designed to help L.A.'s housing crisis. The study provides details on how the tax effects certain real estate transactions saying the measure initially applied to real estate transactions over $5 million, and it imposed a 4% tax on transactions priced between $5 million and $10 million, and a 5.5% tax on transactions over $10 million. The tax thresholds are to be adjusted for inflation every year. Prior to Measure ULA Los Angeles, like many cities, did have a real estate transfer tax, but it was very low: its rate was 0.45%, on transactions above $100,000. The study states that, "For high-end sales, then, Measure ULA represented an almost ninefold increase in the tax rate. ULA's goal is to help alleviate housing burdens, and the revenue it raises is dedicated to projects like homeless housing, affordable housing, and tenant assistance." The Los Angeles Housing Department Dashboard shows that Measure ULA has generated more than $600 million over 939 transactions since it was imposed by the voters.
According to the UCLA study, "...While ULA has real and visible benefits, there are signs that it also carries considerable, albeit less visible, costs. One sign of those costs is the revenue ULA hasn't raised. The measure's supporters are correct that ULA has raised more money than any other local housing program, but this is a depressingly low bar to clear. It's also a different bar than the one laid out when voters were asked to support the measure. When proponents first placed the 'Mansion Tax' on the ballot, they did so estimating that it would raise between $600 million and $1.1 billion annually. It has not come close to hitting that mark. According to the city's ULA Dashboard, from April 2023 to December 2024 the measure actually raised $480 million, or roughly $288 million per year — well below what was anticipated." (citations omitted)
In its conclusion, the UCLA study proclaims that, "In summary, we believe a fair reading of the evidence should give cause for concern. Measure ULA is plausibly reducing a small but disproportionately important segment of real estate transactions. These transactions — the trade in more expensive non-single family property — are pivotal for increasing our housing supply, and for repurposing many spaces that the new economy has rendered obsolete. These transactions also drive growth in the property tax base, which means they have strong fiscal implications for not just the City of L.A. but also the other governments (the county, the school district, and various special districts) that rely on revenue from property in the City of L.A. Not least, discouraging these transactions also reduces ULA's own revenue.
"A final point is that Measure ULA, in targeting these transactions, departs from the spirit in which it was advertised. ULA was heavily promoted as a "Mansion Tax" and a tax on unearned gains, but our evidence suggests it is landing heavily on the trade in commercial, industrial and multifamily residential property. Put another way, Measure ULA was advertised as a tax on what might be called "consumer" real estate — high-value single-family residences — but we see that in practice it lands heavily on investor real estate, which is to say people trying to build, or to operate properties as businesses."
According to the Author
"Transfer taxes can be an excellent tool to raise revenue for local governments, including to help facilitate affordable housing. However, if poorly constructed, they can impact housing production, which would have a detrimental impact on the very communities these taxes are intended to benefit. AB 698 would ensure that elected officials and the electorate are able to make informed decisions about proposed transfer taxes, to help minimize negative impacts and maximize positive benefits."
Arguments in Support
According to a coalition in support of the bill, "AB 698 recognizes that local transfer taxes, while often well-intended, can easily go too far. They quickly make the construction of new multifamily and inclusionary housing projects financially unfeasible, resulting in a reduction of new affordable units. By ensuring that multifamily projects remain financially viable, AB 698 helps preserve union construction jobs and supports the skilled workforce that builds the housing and infrastructure our communities depend on. The state should also recognize real estate properties and investments that have been destroyed by economic metrics as well, which include rising interest rates and construction costs. "According to a recent study from the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, transfer taxes like ULA add new costs in the final stage of development, often compounding an already fragile financial stack in today's high-cost, high-interest environment, an effect the study flags as a serious barrier to new housing. (Phillips, 2020)
"The bill is especially timely for communities throughout the state that are considering replicating Measure ULA, where voters in the City of Los Angeles approved a transfer tax on the sale of high-value property within the city limits to fund low-income housing programs in 2026. The measure was referred to as the "mansion tax" by its supporters and imposes a 4% tax on sales over $5 million and a 5.5% tax on sales over $10 million. However, in practice, the measure applies not just to mansions but to every property over $5 million, including apartment buildings. While the intent behind the measure was to address the housing crisis, it is creating serious unintended consequences for individuals and homebuilders whose multi-family housing projects in the pipeline remain in jeopardy.
"Just this April, Lewis Center issued another compelling report entitled, Taxing Tomorrow: Measure ULA's Impact on Multifamily Housing Production and Potential Reforms, which warns that Measure ULA's current design may undermine its own goals. As development slows, revenue for affordable housing programs could fall far short of expectations. The study notes that applying ULA to new and recently completed developments discourages the very activity that generates revenue. It also suggests that a narrower tax focused on true luxury properties may ultimately raise more funds without damaging housing production (Ward, 2025).
"In order to assist even more residents in the state, AB 698 should be amended to prohibit ALL local jurisdictions from imposing a transfer tax on the sale of multi-family properties that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within 15 years, except for single family homes and properties located in an area where there is a declared local emergency, and the development on the property was destroyed or made uninhabitable. These changes will ensure multi-family housing production remains financially viable and if applicable to existing transfer taxes throughout the state, it would help restore balance to the property tax system and ensure that we're encouraging housing production— not punishing —reinvestment in our cities."
Arguments in Opposition
According to the State Building and Construction Trades Council (SBCTC), "The SBCTC's local building trades council covering Los Angeles and Orange Counties is a part of the United to House LA (ULA) Coalition spanning diverse sectors including affordable housing developers, labor unions, homeless services providers, tenant rights organizations, environmental justice organizations, domestic violence groups, disability rights organizations, senior service groups, mobility justice organizations and more. In November 2022, the UHLA coalition passed Measure ULA in with 58% approval from Los Angeles voters. In under two years since its effective date, the measure has raised over $630 million of funding for 11 programs that build affordable housing, preserve affordable housing, expand homeownership opportunities, protect tenants from displacement, provide income support to seniors and people with disabilities, and prevent homelessness.
"Measure ULA is by far Los Angeles's largest local source of funding for affordable housing. Since the passage and the implementation of ULA, we have seen 798 units of affordable housing developed, yielding 10,000 union construction jobs. Considering ULA's impact in combating the homelessness crisis, we are deeply concerned about AB 698 or any legislation that would harm or disrupt transfer taxes, such as Measure ULA. In the other 22 jurisdictions around the state with enhanced transfer taxes, legislation causing a reduction in their revenues would risk diminishing affordable housing production.
"Lastly, President Trump's slashing of federal programs, including billions of dollars that flow into states is worsening existing fiscal crises. It is at times like this when local revenue becomes the lifeblood that saves jobs, services and economic development activity. Local jurisdictions throughout California need the ability to raise revenues through various means, including transfer taxes. For the City of Los Angeles, the need is immense. Measure ULA remains the primary substantive source of funds for addressing significant housing needs. We firmly oppose efforts that would undermine local revenues, especially at a time of local, state and national fiscal crisis."
FISCAL COMMENTS
None.
VOTES
ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 10-0-0
YES: Carrillo, Ta, Hoover, Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Blanca Rubio, Stefani, Ward, Wilson
UPDATED
VERSION: June 2, 2025
CONSULTANT: Jimmy MacDonald / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0000959
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 698
Author:(Wicks)
As Amended Ver:May 05, 2025
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Requires, before a legislative body adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body to provide an analysis that examines the effect of the proposed tax.
Major Provisions
- Specifies that, before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
- The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
- The production of market-rate housing units.
- Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
- Finds and declares that (a) property tax receipts are reduced by fewer property sales ad that a reduction in property tax has a countywide impact, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs. Therefore, this bill applies to all cities, including charter cities.
COMMENTS
Documentary Transfer Taxes. The California Constitution and state statute prohibit transaction taxes or sales taxes on transfers of real property. The DTT Act allows counties to levy a tax upon the recording of documents that transfer interests in real property. All 58 counties impose a DTT, which is levied at a rate of 55 cents per $500 (or 0.11%) of the value of the real property or interest being transferred. The Act allows a city within a county that has adopted a DTT to impose a DTT at one-half of the county rate. The amount of tax paid to a city is a credit against the amount of the tax owed to a county. Most cities levy a DTT pursuant to the Act. Under the "municipal affairs" doctrine established by Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution, some charter cities tax the transfer of ownership of real estate at rates that exceed the statutory limit on the DTT.
Recent Real Estate Transfer Tax Measure. A recent University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) study titled, The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA, released in April 2025, discusses the effect of the passage that Measure ULA has had on higher-end real estate transaction in the City of Los Angeles (L.A.). Measure ULA was placed on the ballot by and approved by L.A. voters in 2022 with a 57.77% vote. Measure ULA went into effect in April 2023. The tax was framed as a "Mansion Tax", and it imposed a real estate transfer tax designed to help L.A.'s housing crisis. The study provides details on how the tax effects certain real estate transactions saying the measure initially applied to real estate transactions over $5 million, and it imposed a 4% tax on transactions priced between $5 million and $10 million, and a 5.5% tax on transactions over $10 million. The tax thresholds are to be adjusted for inflation every year. Prior to Measure ULA Los Angeles, like many cities, did have a real estate transfer tax, but it was very low: its rate was 0.45%, on transactions above $100,000. The study states that, "For high-end sales, then, Measure ULA represented an almost ninefold increase in the tax rate. ULA's goal is to help alleviate housing burdens, and the revenue it raises is dedicated to projects like homeless housing, affordable housing, and tenant assistance." The Los Angeles Housing Department Dashboard shows that Measure ULA has generated more than $600 million over 939 transactions since it was imposed by the voters.
According to the UCLA study, "...While ULA has real and visible benefits, there are signs that it also carries considerable, albeit less visible, costs. One sign of those costs is the revenue ULA hasn't raised. The measure's supporters are correct that ULA has raised more money than any other local housing program, but this is a depressingly low bar to clear. It's also a different bar than the one laid out when voters were asked to support the measure. When proponents first placed the 'Mansion Tax' on the ballot, they did so estimating that it would raise between $600 million and $1.1 billion annually. It has not come close to hitting that mark. According to the city's ULA Dashboard, from April 2023 to December 2024 the measure actually raised $480 million, or roughly $288 million per year — well below what was anticipated." (citations omitted)
In its conclusion, the UCLA study proclaims that, "In summary, we believe a fair reading of the evidence should give cause for concern. Measure ULA is plausibly reducing a small but disproportionately important segment of real estate transactions. These transactions — the trade in more expensive non-single family property — are pivotal for increasing our housing supply, and for repurposing many spaces that the new economy has rendered obsolete. These transactions also drive growth in the property tax base, which means they have strong fiscal implications for not just the City of L.A. but also the other governments (the county, the school district, and various special districts) that rely on revenue from property in the City of L.A. Not least, discouraging these transactions also reduces ULA's own revenue.
"A final point is that Measure ULA, in targeting these transactions, departs from the spirit in which it was advertised. ULA was heavily promoted as a "Mansion Tax" and a tax on unearned gains, but our evidence suggests it is landing heavily on the trade in commercial, industrial and multifamily residential property. Put another way, Measure ULA was advertised as a tax on what might be called "consumer" real estate — high-value single-family residences — but we see that in practice it lands heavily on investor real estate, which is to say people trying to build, or to operate properties as businesses."
According to the Author
"Transfer taxes can be an excellent tool to raise revenue for local governments, including to help facilitate affordable housing. However, if poorly constructed, they can impact housing production, which would have a detrimental impact on the very communities these taxes are intended to benefit. AB 698 would ensure that elected officials and the electorate are able to make informed decisions about proposed transfer taxes, to help minimize negative impacts and maximize positive benefits."
Arguments in Support
According to a coalition in support of the bill, "AB 698 recognizes that local transfer taxes, while often well-intended, can easily go too far. They quickly make the construction of new multifamily and inclusionary housing projects financially unfeasible, resulting in a reduction of new affordable units. By ensuring that multifamily projects remain financially viable, AB 698 helps preserve union construction jobs and supports the skilled workforce that builds the housing and infrastructure our communities depend on. The state should also recognize real estate properties and investments that have been destroyed by economic metrics as well, which include rising interest rates and construction costs. "According to a recent study from the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, transfer taxes like ULA add new costs in the final stage of development, often compounding an already fragile financial stack in today's high-cost, high-interest environment, an effect the study flags as a serious barrier to new housing. (Phillips, 2020)
"The bill is especially timely for communities throughout the state that are considering replicating Measure ULA, where voters in the City of Los Angeles approved a transfer tax on the sale of high-value property within the city limits to fund low-income housing programs in 2026. The measure was referred to as the "mansion tax" by its supporters and imposes a 4% tax on sales over $5 million and a 5.5% tax on sales over $10 million. However, in practice, the measure applies not just to mansions but to every property over $5 million, including apartment buildings. While the intent behind the measure was to address the housing crisis, it is creating serious unintended consequences for individuals and homebuilders whose multi-family housing projects in the pipeline remain in jeopardy.
"Just this April, Lewis Center issued another compelling report entitled, "Taxing Tomorrow: Measure ULA's Impact on Multifamily Housing Production and Potential Reforms," which warns that Measure ULA's current design may undermine its own goals. As development slows, revenue for affordable housing programs could fall far short of expectations. The study notes that applying ULA to new and recently completed developments discourages the very activity that generates revenue. It also suggests that a narrower tax focused on true luxury properties may ultimately raise more funds without damaging housing production (Ward, 2025).
"In order to assist even more residents in the state, AB 698 should be amended to prohibit ALL local jurisdictions from imposing a transfer tax on the sale of multi-family properties that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within 15 years, except for single family homes and properties located in an area where there is a declared local emergency, and the development on the property was destroyed or made uninhabitable. These changes will ensure multi-family housing production remains financially viable and if applicable to existing transfer taxes throughout the state, it would help restore balance to the property tax system and ensure that we're encouraging housing production— not punishing —reinvestment in our cities."
Arguments in Opposition
According to the State Building and Construction Trades Council (SBCTC), "The SBCTC's local building trades council covering Los Angeles and Orange Counties is a part of the United to House LA (ULA) Coalition spanning diverse sectors including affordable housing developers, labor unions, homeless services providers, tenant rights organizations, environmental justice organizations, domestic violence groups, disability rights organizations, senior service groups, mobility justice organizations and more. In November 2022, the UHLA coalition passed Measure ULA in with 58% approval from Los Angeles voters. In under two years since its effective date, the measure has raised over $630 million of funding for 11 programs that build affordable housing, preserve affordable housing, expand homeownership opportunities, protect tenants from displacement, provide income support to seniors and people with disabilities, and prevent homelessness.
"Measure ULA is by far Los Angeles's largest local source of funding for affordable housing. Since the passage and the implementation of ULA, we have seen 798 units of affordable housing developed, yielding 10,000 union construction jobs. Considering ULA's impact in combating the homelessness crisis, we are deeply concerned about AB 698 or any legislation that would harm or disrupt transfer taxes, such as Measure ULA. In the other 22 jurisdictions around the state with enhanced transfer taxes, legislation causing a reduction in their revenues would risk diminishing affordable housing production.
"Lastly, President Trump's slashing of federal programs, including billions of dollars that flow into states is worsening existing fiscal crises. It is at times like this when local revenue becomes the lifeblood that saves jobs, services and economic development activity. Local jurisdictions throughout California need the ability to raise revenues through various means, including transfer taxes. For the City of Los Angeles, the need is immense. Measure ULA remains the primary substantive source of funds for addressing significant housing needs. We firmly oppose efforts that would undermine local revenues, especially at a time of local, state and national fiscal crisis."
FISCAL COMMENTS
None.
VOTES
ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 10-0-0
YES: Carrillo, Ta, Hoover, Pacheco, Ramos, Ransom, Blanca Rubio, Stefani, Ward, Wilson
UPDATED
VERSION: May 05, 2025
CONSULTANT: Jimmy MacDonald / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN: 0000331
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2025
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Juan Carrillo, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 698 (
Author:Wicks) – As Amended Ver:March 28, 2025
SUBJECT: Local taxation: real property transfers.
SUMMARY: Requires, before a legislative body adopts any transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body to provide an analysis that examines the effect of the proposed tax and to include this analysis in the ballot materials of the respective ballot measure to implement the tax. Specifically, this bill:
- Specifies that, before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transaction or sales tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
- The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
- The production of market-rate housing units.
- Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
- Provides that any ballot measure submitted to the voters of a city that proposes to implement a transfer tax shall include, in the ballot material provided to each voter, the analysis developed pursuant to 1), above.
- Finds and declares that (a) the greatly diminished ad valorem property tax revenue, which flows outside the city and county boundaries and into schools, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs. Therefore, this bill applies to all cities, including charter cities.
EXISTING LAW:
- Provides that any change in state statute which results in any taxpayer paying a higher tax must be imposed by an act passed by not less than two-thirds of all members elected to each of the two houses of the Legislature, except that no new ad valorem taxes on real property, or sales or transaction taxes on the sales of real property may be imposed (California Constitution, Article XIIIA, Section 3).
- Authorizes cities, counties, and special districts, by a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors of such district, to impose special taxes on such district, except ad valorem taxes on real property or a transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within such city, county or special district (California Constitution, Article XIIIA, Section 4).
- Specifies that, except as permitted in Section 1 of Article XIII A of the California Constitution, no local government or district may impose any ad valorem taxes on real property. No local government or district may impose any transaction tax or sales tax on the sale of real property within the city, county or district (Government Code § 53725).
- Establishes the Documentary Transfer Tax (DTT) Act that governs the authority of a city or county to impose a transfer tax and provides for specific exemptions to the tax [Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC) §§ 11901-11935].
- Specifies that the board of supervisors of any county or city and county, by an ordinance, may impose, on each deed, instrument, or writing by which any lands, tenements, or other realty sold within the county shall be granted, assigned, transferred, or otherwise conveyed to, or vested in, the purchaser or purchasers, or any other person or persons, by their direction, when the consideration or value of the interest or property conveyed (exclusive of the value of any lien or encumbrance remaining thereon at the time of sale) exceeds $100 a tax at the rate of $0.55 for each $500 or fractional part thereof (RTC § 11911).
- Provides that the legislative body of any city which is within a county which has imposed a tax pursuant to 2), above may, by an ordinance adopted pursuant to this part, impose, on each deed, instrument, or writing by which any lands, tenements, or other realty sold within the city shall be granted, assigned, transferred, or otherwise conveyed to, or vested in, the purchaser or purchasers, or any other person or persons, by their direction, when the consideration or value of the interest or property conveyed (exclusive of the value of any lien or encumbrance remaining thereon at the time of sale) exceeds $100, a tax at the rate of one-half the amount specified in 2), above, for each $500 or fractional part thereof (RTC § 11911).
- Requires a credit to be allowed against the tax imposed by a county ordinance for the amount of any tax due to any city by reason of an ordinance (RTC § 11911).
- Species that any tax imposed pursuant to 2) and 3), above, shall be paid by any person who makes, signs or issues any document or instrument subject to the tax, or for whose use or benefit the same is made, signed or issued (RTC § 11912).
FISCAL EFFECT: None.
COMMENTS:
- Bill Summary. This bill requires that, before a legislative body adopts any transaction or sales tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body must develop and post on its website an analysis that examines the effect of the proposed transfer tax. The analysis must include information related to housing production and property tax revenue and must be included in the ballot materials, provided to each voter, on the ballot measure. The author is the sponsor of this bill.
- Author’s Statement. According to the Author, “Transfer taxes can be an excellent tool to raise revenue for local governments, including to help facilitate affordable housing. However, if poorly constructed, they can impact housing production, which would have a detrimental impact on the very communities these taxes are intended to benefit. AB 698
would ensure that elected officials and the electorate are able to make informed decisions about proposed transfer taxes, to help minimize negative impacts and maximize positive benefits.”
- Documentary Transfer Taxes. The California Constitution and state statute prohibit transaction taxes or sales taxes on transfers of real property. The DTT Act allows counties to levy a tax upon the recording of documents that transfer interests in real property. All 58 counties impose a DTT, which is levied at a rate of 55 cents per $500 (or 0.11%) of the value of the real property or interest being transferred. The Act allows a city within a county that has adopted a DTT to impose a DTT at one-half of the county rate. The amount of tax paid to a city is a credit against the amount of the tax owed to a county. Most cities levy a DTT pursuant to the Act. Under the “municipal affairs” doctrine established by Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution, some charter cities tax the transfer of ownership of real estate at rates that exceed the statutory limit on the DTT.
- Recent Real Estate Transfer Tax Measure. A recent University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) study titled, The Unintended Consequences of Measure ULA, released in April 2025, discusses the effect of the passage that Measure ULA has had on higher-end real estate transaction in the City of Los Angeles (L.A.). Measure ULA was placed on the ballot by and approved by L.A. voters in 2022 with a 57.77% vote. Measure ULA went into effect in April 2023. The tax was framed as a “Mansion Tax”, and it imposed a real estate transfer tax designed to help L.A.’s housing crisis. The study provides details on how the tax effects certain real estate transactions saying the measure initially applied to real estate transactions over $5 million, and it imposed a 4% tax on transactions priced between $5 million and $10 million, and a 5.5% tax on transactions over $10 million. The tax thresholds are to be adjusted for inflation every year. Prior to Measure ULA Los Angeles, like many cities, did have a real estate transfer tax, but it was very low: its rate was 0.45%, on transactions above $100,000. The study states that, “For high-end sales, then, Measure ULA represented an almost ninefold increase in the tax rate. ULA’s goal is to help alleviate housing burdens, and the revenue it raises is dedicated to projects like homeless housing, affordable housing, and tenant assistance.” The Los Angeles Housing Department Dashboard shows that Measure ULA has generated more than $600 million over 939 transactions since it was imposed by the voters.
According to the UCLA study, “...While ULA has real and visible benefits, there are signs that it also carries considerable, albeit less visible, costs. One sign of those costs is the revenue ULA hasn’t raised. The measure’s supporters are correct that ULA has raised more money than any other local housing program, but this is a depressingly low bar to clear. It’s also a different bar than the one laid out when voters were asked to support the measure. When proponents first placed the ‘Mansion Tax’ on the ballot, they did so estimating that it would raise between $600 million and $1.1 billion annually. It has not come close to hitting that mark. According to the city’s ULA Dashboard, from April 2023 to December 2024 the measure actually raised $480 million, or roughly $288 million per year — well below what was anticipated.” (citations omitted)
In its conclusion, the UCLA study proclaims that, “In summary, we believe a fair reading of the evidence should give cause for concern. Measure ULA is plausibly reducing a small but disproportionately important segment of real estate transactions. These transactions — the trade in more expensive non-single family property — are pivotal for increasing our housing supply, and for repurposing many spaces that the new economy has rendered obsolete. These transactions also drive growth in the property tax base, which means they have strong fiscal implications for not just the City of L.A. but also the other governments (the county, the school district, and various special districts) that rely on revenue from property in the City of L.A. Not least, discouraging these transactions also reduces ULA’s own revenue.
“A final point is that Measure ULA, in targeting these transactions, departs from the spirit in which it was advertised. ULA was heavily promoted as a “Mansion Tax” and a tax on unearned gains, but our evidence suggests it is landing heavily on the trade in commercial, industrial and multifamily residential property. Put another way, Measure ULA was advertised as a tax on what might be called “consumer” real estate — high-value single-family residences — but we see that in practice it lands heavily on investor real estate, which is to say people trying to build, or to operate properties as businesses.”
- Local Elections. Elections Code Sections 13300-13303 require county elections officials to mail a county voter information guide to each voter in the jurisdiction, as specified. Existing law requires the county voter information guide to contain, among other things, a copy of the official ballot (sample ballot), a notice of the polling place, a complete copy of each local measure, and an analysis of each measure.
California’s Election Code also provides for the requirements a city must follow when a measure qualifies for the ballot. The city attorney must prepare an impartial analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on existing law and the operation of the measure. The analysis must include a statement indicating whether the measure was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters or by the governing body of the city. Arguments for and against a city measure can be submitted to the voter of the city.
- Policy Considerations. The Committee may wish to consider the following:
- Accuracy. This bill requires a city to examine the effect a transfer tax may have on the production of housing and on property tax revenue. However, many elements out of the control of a city often effect the housing market and housing production. It could be difficult for a city to estimate how the tax may ultimately have an effect on housing and property taxes in conjunction with such factors as variable inflation and interest rates, the cost of materials and labor, among others. Given the uncertainty of numerous dynamics that might affect housing production and property taxes, the Committee may wish to consider if cities will be able to sufficiently provide an accurate analysis.
- How to Comply. This bill mandates a city to include the analysis this bill requires in the materials of any ballot measure proposing to implement a transfer tax. Concerns have been raised by the League of Cities saying, “To be able to analyze how a specific property transfer tax in a given city would factor into the broader macroeconomic landscape would be speculative. This is problematic because Elections Code Section 9280 requires a city attorney to provide a ‘true and impartial analysis’ of a local ballot measure.” Additionally, the League of Cities states that, “The Elections Code emphasizes the importance of providing objective, non-partisan, non-prejudicial information to the voters. The information AB 698 requires is necessarily speculative and would be perceived to be more aligned with the arguments for and against the measure that are contained within the ballot. The courts have also emphasized the importance of these summaries being neutral and not creating an argument for or against the measure in cases such as Jobs and Housing Coalition v. City of Oakland (December 2021) and Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of Equalization (1978).” Given these concerns, the Committee may wish to consider if including the analysis this bill requires in the ballot materials is appropriate.
- Accuracy. This bill requires a city to examine the effect a transfer tax may have on the production of housing and on property tax revenue. However, many elements out of the control of a city often effect the housing market and housing production. It could be difficult for a city to estimate how the tax may ultimately have an effect on housing and property taxes in conjunction with such factors as variable inflation and interest rates, the cost of materials and labor, among others. Given the uncertainty of numerous dynamics that might affect housing production and property taxes, the Committee may wish to consider if cities will be able to sufficiently provide an accurate analysis.
- Committee Amendments. In order to respond to the policy considerations above, the Committee may wish to amend the bill as follows:
37100.6. (a) Before a legislative body, including, but not limited to, the legislative body of a charter city, adopts any transaction or sales transfer tax on the sale of real property, the legislative body shall develop and post on its internet website an analysis that examines, at a minimum, the effect of the proposed transfer tax on all of the following:
(1) The production of affordable housing, including affordable housing produced by market-rate housing projects.
(2) The production of market-rate housing units.
(3) Property tax revenue for the city, county, state, and any relevant special districts.
(b) Any ballot measure submitted to the voters of a city that proposes to implement a transfer tax shall include, in the ballot material provided to each voter, the analysis developed pursuant to subdivision (a).
SEC. 2. The Legislature finds and declares (a) property tax receipts are reduced by fewer property sales and that a reduction in property tax has a countywide impact; the greatly diminished ad valorem property tax revenue, which flows outside the city to counties and into schools, and (b) the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income levels in this state, are matters of statewide concern and are not municipal affairs as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, Section 1 of this act adding Section 37100.6 to the Government Code applies to all cities, including charter cities.
- Arguments in Support. According to a coalition in support of the bill, “AB 698 recognizes that local transfer taxes, while often well-intended, can easily go too far. They quickly make the construction of new multifamily and inclusionary housing projects financially unfeasible, resulting in a reduction of new affordable units. By ensuring that multifamily projects remain financially viable, AB 698 helps preserve union construction jobs and supports the skilled workforce that builds the housing and infrastructure our communities depend on. The state should also recognize real estate properties and investments that have been destroyed by economic metrics as well, which include rising interest rates and construction costs. “According to a recent study from the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, transfer taxes like ULA add new costs in the final stage of development, often compounding an already fragile financial stack in today’s high-cost, high-interest environment, an effect the study flags as a serious barrier to new housing. (Phillips, 2020)
“The bill is especially timely for communities throughout the state that are considering replicating Measure ULA, where voters in the City of Los Angeles approved a transfer tax on the sale of high-value property within the city limits to fund low-income housing programs in 2026. The measure was referred to as the “mansion tax” by its supporters and imposes a 4% tax on sales over $5 million and a 5.5% tax on sales over $10 million. However, in practice, the measure applies not just to mansions but to every property over $5 million, including apartment buildings. While the intent behind the measure was to address the housing crisis, it is creating serious unintended consequences for individuals and homebuilders whose multi-family housing projects in the pipeline remain in jeopardy.
“Just this April, Lewis Center issued another compelling report entitled, “Taxing Tomorrow: Measure ULA’s Impact on Multifamily Housing Production and Potential Reforms,” which warns that Measure ULA’s current design may undermine its own goals. As development slows, revenue for affordable housing programs could fall far short of expectations. The study notes that applying ULA to new and recently completed developments discourages the very activity that generates revenue. It also suggests that a narrower tax focused on true luxury properties may ultimately raise more funds without damaging housing production (Ward, 2025).
“In order to assist even more residents in the state, AB 698 should be amended to prohibit ALL local jurisdictions from imposing a transfer tax on the sale of multi-family properties that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within 15 years, except for single family homes and properties located in an area where there is a declared local emergency, and the development on the property was destroyed or made uninhabitable. These changes will ensure multi-family housing production remains financially viable and if applicable to existing transfer taxes throughout the state, it would help restore balance to the property tax system and ensure that we’re encouraging housing production— not punishing —reinvestment in our cities.”
- Arguments in Opposition. According to the State Building and Construction Trades Council (SBCTC), “The SBCTC’s local building trades council covering Los Angeles and Orange Counties is a part of the United to House LA (ULA) Coalition spanning diverse sectors including affordable housing developers, labor unions, homeless services providers, tenant rights organizations, environmental justice organizations, domestic violence groups, disability rights organizations, senior service groups, mobility justice organizations and more. In November 2022, the UHLA coalition passed Measure ULA in with 58% approval from Los Angeles voters. In under two years since its effective date, the measure has raised over $630 million of funding for 11 programs that build affordable housing, preserve affordable housing, expand homeownership opportunities, protect tenants from displacement, provide income support to seniors and people with disabilities, and prevent homelessness.
“Measure ULA is by far Los Angeles's largest local source of funding for affordable housing. Since the passage and the implementation of ULA, we have seen 798 units of affordable housing developed, yielding 10,000 union construction jobs. Considering ULA's impact in combating the homelessness crisis, we are deeply concerned about AB 698 or any legislation that would harm or disrupt transfer taxes, such as Measure ULA. In the other 22 jurisdictions around the state with enhanced transfer taxes, legislation causing a reduction in their revenues would risk diminishing affordable housing production.
“Lastly, President Trump’s slashing of federal programs, including billions of dollars that flow into states is worsening existing fiscal crises. It is at times like this when local revenue becomes the lifeblood that saves jobs, services and economic development activity. Local jurisdictions throughout California need the ability to raise revenues through various means, including transfer taxes. For the City of Los Angeles, the need is immense. Measure ULA remains the primary substantive source of funds for addressing significant housing needs. We firmly oppose efforts that would undermine local revenues, especially at a time of local, state and national fiscal crisis.”
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Abundant Housing LA
Bay Area Council
Building Owners and Managers of Greater Los Angeles
California Downtown Association
California Yimby
Circulate San Diego
Council of Infill Builders
East Bay Yimby
Elevate California
Employers Group
Greater Los Angeles Realtors
Grow the Richmond
Housing Action Coalition
Mountain View Yimby
Multicultural Business Alliance
Naiop Socal Chapter
Napa-Solano for Everyone
Northern Neighbors
Peninsula for Everyone
Santa Cruz Yimby
Santa Rosa Yimby
SF Yimby
South Bay Yimby
The Two Hundred
Ventura County Yimby
Yimby Action
Yimby LA
Yimby Slo
Opposition
ACCE
ACT -LA
Active San Gabriel Valley
AFGE Local 1260, AFL-CIO
Beverly-vermont Community Land Trust
Brotherhood Crusade
Communities for a Better Environment
Community Power Collective
Corporation for Supportive Housing
East LA Community Corporation
East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice
Esperanza Community Housing
Fideicomiso Comunitario Tierra Libre
Fusion Community Empowerment
Homes & Hope
IBEW Local 11
Iron Workers Local 433
KIWA (Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance)
LA Alliance for a New Economy
LA Forward
LCLAA Los Angeles
Liberty Community Land Trust
Liberty Hill Foundation
Long Beach Residents Empowered
Los Angeles County Federation of Labor
Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust
Los Angeles / Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council
Move LA
Public Advocates
Public Counsel
SAJE
Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights
Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Tenants Together
T.r.u.s.t. South LA
U.A. Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 761
United to House Los Angeles
USC Gould School of Law Housing Law and Policy Clinic
WLCAC Re-entry
Analysis Prepared by: Jimmy MacDonald / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
Discussed in Hearing
View Older HearingsBill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):