Assembly Standing Committee on Housing and Community Development

Three of those are on consent: items one, which is AB 1782, item two, which is AB 1878, and item seven, which is AB 2144. Each bill can have two main witnesses in support. In opposition, each main witness will have two minutes each. I invite you to feel free to submit written testimony through the position portal on the Committee's website if you've not done so. This will become part of the official record of bill.

The hearing room will be open for attendance of this hearing, and all are encouraged to watch the hearing, of course, from its stream on the Assembly's website. Want to thank you for your patience and understanding. And I wanted to have a special welcome to our new senior consultant, Dory-- I know I'm going to butcher-- Ganetsos. Welcome, Dory. We have a full house.

We're grateful for your expertise and I want to thank you in advance for all your help for this Committee and the hard work ahead for us. With that, we are on sign in order this morning. Not seeing the list in front of me. Who's first? Okay, Mr. Ramos is not in attendance at the moment, so we will jump to Ms. Boerner. You may approach the presentation. We are going to be taking up item number four, AB 2007.

You may come up with your primary witnesses and begin when you are ready.

Good morning, Mr. Chair Members. AB 2007, legislature established a three year pilot project of the Unicorn Homes Transitional housing for Homeless LGBTQ youth program in up to five selected counties. LGBTQ centers within each county would administer the program, providing crisis intervention with trauma informed approach to house eligible youth and LGBTQ affirming house homes. People who identify as LGBTQ and are experiencing homelessness have greater difficulty finding shelters that accept and respect them.

Oftentimes, LGBTQ community is at greater risk of assault, trauma and early death compared to their heterosexual peers. Addressing the housing crisis is a key priority for the state, and I know all of us here, but there's no state housing program targeted directly at LGBTQ youth experiencing homelessness.

Unicorn Homes is a program within North County San Diego LGBTQ Resource center that aims to provide crisis intervention and transitional housing to LGBTQ youth who are experiencing homelessness due to family rejection, with the ultimate goal of reuniting families where possible. Similar programs called Host Homes exist in downtown San Diego LGBTQ Community center and Sacramento LGBTQ Community center that help house LGBTQ youth experiencing homelessness and LGBTQ affirming homes.

Unfortunately, due to challenges attributed to the pandemic, the host homes program in Sacramento had to end its operations last year. They made the difficult decision to divert funds from the host homes program to continue operating an all inclusive youth shelter. Establishing Unicorn's home pilot project would provide stable housing for lgbtq youth experiencing homelessness. It would also provide a path to mental health resources, job readiness and independent living skills through the LGBTQ centers.

The Unicorn Homes program does not require the development of new built infrastructure, making it low cost, flexible and valuable stepping stone when youth wait for more permanent solutions with increased intolerance and hostility towards the LGBTQ community, it is imperative that we have a safety net for the population of youth that experiences family rejection at a higher rate than outside the LGBTQ spectrum. I respectfully ask for an aye vote and with me I have Craig Pulsipher. I got it.

Finally, Legislative Director of Equality California, one of the co sponsors of this bill.

Thank you. Good morning. Chair and Members Craig Pulsipher on behalf of Equality California, a proud co sponsor of this bill. As many of you know, estimates suggest that roughly 40% of homeless youth are LGBTQ, and according to recent data from the Trevor project, nearly a third of LGBTQ young people reported experiencing homelessness or housing instability at some point in their lives.

These rates are even higher among Trans and non binary youth than LGBTQ youth of color. Many of these youth have been disowned by their families or escaping emotional and physical abuse because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. But family rejection is certainly not the only cause. Aging out of the foster care system, poverty and shortages of affirming shelters and housing programs can also leave many LGBTQ young people with nowhere to go.

Unhoused LGBTQ youth experience higher rates of mental health challenges, including depression, PTSD, and even suicide. They are also at even greater risk of violence, trafficking, and further emotional or physical abuse in shelters or on the streets. Low barrier housing programs like this one are desperately needed to support the growing number of unhoused LGBTQ young people in California, especially those that are welcoming, affirming and include access to other support services.

Several LGBT centers across the state, including in San Diego, LA and Sacramento, have developed innovative programs that provide transitional housing and support services for LGBTQ youth. An AB 2007 is an important and timely measure to build on and evaluate these existing programs. The three year pilot project would support up to five LGBT community organizations to help identify and train volunteer host families who could provide LGBTQ youth with a safe and affirming place to stay and provide crisis intervention care.

With a trauma informed approach, the program would help to promote housing stability for LGBTQ young people with an ultimate goal of reuniting them with their families whenever possible. Over the last several years, the Legislature has rightly made homelessness one of its top priorities. Yet programs to address the specific needs of unhoused LGBTQ youth remain far too limited. 10 seconds. AB 2007 is an important measure to address the unique challenges facing these vulnerable youth, and I respectfully urge your aye vote.

Thank you very much. Are there any other supporters in the room who wish to register the support? Please approach the microphone. Seeing none, is there any primary witness in opposition?

Good morning. My name is Charlotte. Good morning. My name is Charlotte. I'm from our duty. AB 27 is another anti child, antifamily Bill. It is the Trojan horse we predicted. AB 2007 is a funding Bill that greases the skids for unicorn homes across California.

This Bill will use taxpayer dollars to pay unvetted strangers to be host families for all LGBTQ runaways shaken loose from their real homes and real families by AB 665. We see what you're doing with AB 665. You made it so our 12 year olds could run away into residential shelter for any reason. Then with AB 2007, you will use our tax dollars to place our children with unicorn families, strangers who say they will be affirming and supportive.

How much will these strangers be paid to take away each runaway child? In its own website, Unicorn Home is intended for kids as young as 14 to 24. But this bill, called Unicorn Homes Transitional Housing, says it provides funding for 18 to 24 year olds. Why does this bill say 18 to 24 year olds? We know that it's just because the bill will be amended to provide funding to house kids as young as 14. Temporary care for minors is already provided by foster care.

Why is this bill necessary? Foster care requires licensing and checkups on these children to ensure their needs are met. AB 2007 contains no licensing requirement or oversight of the host family. Why? AB 2007 says the goal of the Unicorn Home Program will be to reunite children with their families, but says nothing about who or how this will be performed. AB 2007 will Fund temporary care only for homeless youth who identify as LGBTQ. What about the other homeless youth. Isn't this discriminatory?

With AB 2007, the child Emancipation Pathway will be complete. The state will expose our children to age inappropriate curriculum materials about sexuality, allow children to have private counseling sessions without parental consent, and allow schools to socially transition children without parental consent.

Thank you for your comments. Are there any other comments in opposition? Seeing none, we'll turn it back to the dais. Mr. Zbur.

So one of the reasons I was very excited to be able to sub into this committee today was because of this bill. I want to thank the author for bringing this bill. I know this has been one of her passion projects over the last couple of years. These kinds of programs are badly needed. When I listen to sort of the critics of these kinds of programs, one of the things that comes to mind is the fact the folks that are criticizing these programs have absolutely no sense of care for the 40% of homeless youth who happen to be LGBTQ and are doing absolutely nothing about it.

This is one of the things that's happening out there that, frankly, should be available to all youth and all adults who are homeless. And so this bill marries, I think, one of my passion projects, and I know it's something that I've discussed with the committee chair before, which is the fact that we need to do much more to prevent homelessness using sort of unique, more cost effective ways of doing this.

This is really sort of marrying sort of the board and care concept with transitional services into targeted communities. And it's much cheaper than other ways of intervening. It's much more compassionate than other ways of intervening. It is something that should be spread across the state, and it's a more cost effective way of dealing with these kids that, frankly, are being thrown out of their homes by their parents who are not accepting their gender identity or their sexual orientation.

So when I hear the criticisms that are being leveled at this bill, it frankly makes me very angry because I think they're motivated by animus, and frankly, and it focuses the facts on the. For me, it focuses on the fact that the folks that are criticizing this bill are doing absolutely nothing, absolutely nothing to try to care for these kids who are living on the street. 40% of homeless youth are members of the LGBTQ community.

That is something like, I don't know, five times the rate of LGBTQ kids in the population. We have a problem. We need to deal with it. This is a unique way of dealing with it, and I'm very proud of you, my Assembly colleague and of Equality California, for coming forward with this bill. I love it, and I think we should be doing more to spread this across the state. So thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr. Zbur. This time we have a quorum, so I'm going to ask Madam Secretary to call the role.

[Roll Call]

With that we have a quorum. Thank you. Mr. Zbur, would you be willing to entertain a motion? Okay. The motion is to move this to human services and seconded by Ms. Reyes. Any other member comments? Yes. Mr. Patterson, Vice Chair.

Thank you. Well, normally I'd always compliment anybody bringing back a bill that the Governor vetoed, but this is for 18 to 24 year olds, is that correct?

Okay. The Unicorn Homes program in North County, San Diego is also 18 to 24, and everybody is. Thank you for bringing this Bill. I think it's so important. I just hope that when they're selecting the five counties, that San Bernardino is one of them. I know Riverside has a very successful program.

The state has invested specifically there, and the village is one of the best. And I'm looking forward to San Bernardino getting the very same thing for our lgbtq youth. Okay. I'm not sure how we're selecting the counties, but

Duly noted that you slid that in in your testimony.

Thank you, Chair Ward. I also want to thank the author for bringing this forward. And second, the comments from Senator Zbur on how important it is, especially for this vulnerable community, particularly transgender youth.

And I look forward to seeing the results from the program. I'm confident it will be successful because this community definitely needs the support and hopefully we can expand it beyond the five eventually and have it become a statewide program. But it all starts here, so I appreciate it.

My original version of the Bill required every county to have one.

Thank you. Seeing no other members wish to comment. Ms. Boerner, I want to thank you for reintroducing this bill. Despite our fiscal challenges.

I do believe it's incredibly important that we recognize that the data supports that we need programs specifically for some that are most vulnerable and to some, reserve points are in very dire situations. So I know that this program is going to be able to save lives, transform lives, help point our transitional age youth in the right direction. I'm happy to be.

If you'll have me on as a principal, co author and as the Vice Chair of the LGBT caucus, I want to thank you for your leadership in this space. With that, would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Call the roll.

Motion to pass to the Assembly Committee on Human Services. [Roll Call]

That Bill passes, 7. zero to two, and it is out. Thank you very much. Next, we'll go back to Mr. Ramos. This is item number 11, AB 2520. When you are ready, feel free to present.

That passes 7-0-2

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members, I would like to begin by accepting Committee amendments.

Thank you.

Thank you. Coordinated entry systems are meant to help our communities prioritize those who are in the most need of assistance. Yet we have noticed that youth in particular are at a disadvantage because they may have shorter lengths of time experiencing homelessness. This means that a chronically homeless individual is compared against a youth who may recently be struggling with homelessness. When that happens, we risk creating another statistic to the youth to adult pipeline of homelessness. In combating youth homelessness, we must use all tools available to address the problem early. To prevent that from happening.

AB 2520 would take the necessary step of requiring a youth specific, coordinated entry system to make the current system more successful and accessible for our youth. The overall goal is to provide a ... appropriate fix to the gaps in service we are currently noticing. Doing this can go a long way in reducing the number of people experiencing homelessness in the long run. With me today to testify is David Baker, a formerly homeless youth with the YMCA of San Diego, and Kim Lewis with the California Coalition for Youth.

Good morning. Thank you for holding space for this Bill, Chair Ward, and Committee Members, my name is David Baker. I work with the YMCA of San Diego County. As a Youth Systems Director, I'm here to share a bit about the importance of this youth specific, coordinated entry. We have an existing system in San Diego County, and it works relatively well.

I think this Bill presents the opportunity to build upon the existing system, specifically with focusing energy around tools like our vulnerability assessment that helps determine prioritization into housing. We heard earlier about how many young people are on the street, and there are so many different needs that arise amongst youth who are experiencing homelessness, whether they are cast out because they're LGBTQ or they're aging out of the foster system.

And this wide range of needs oftentimes confuses prioritization, and it may lead to increased wait times, to getting into resources that can resolve their homelessness and ultimately forces youth to compete with other populations who may have more experience navigating the system or even forces youth into heavily impacted services and resources. So what we're looking to do here is create a clear path for youth to exit homelessness and ultimately reduce the number of chronically homeless adults that we'll see tomorrow.

And I just really want to harp on that. Addressing youth homelessness directly impacts the chronic adult homelessness that we see in our communities. And so by requiring a coordinated entry system that's designed for youth, we clear those barriers, the barriers that already exist. We have young people who are transitioning into adulthood. There are familial barriers that hold them back. There's so many things in this world that transition age youth are focused on. The last thing we want them to focus on is if they're going to be prioritized and if their needs are going to be met. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Chair Warden, Members of the Committee. Kim Lewis, co sponsor of this Bill with the California Coalition for Youth. And I just want to first start by thanking the staff for working with us on the amendments in the Bill and the analysis.

We know our young people experience homelessness very differently than the others have populations experiencing homelessness. And the legislatures long recognize this uniqueness of our young people, starting with the Homeless Emergency Aid Program and followed by the HAPP program, where we have created, set aside specifically for our young people. Further, in round 3 and 4 of HAPP, the Legislature encouraged our communities to be creating youth specific, coordinated entry systems or making these systems work for our young people.

So this Bill really just takes that next step to get us there, because without an effective youth centered system, it will encourage our young people to go through unnecessary processes of repeating questions that are often very intrusive, I would say, and very nontrauma informed. And so it makes them repeat trauma experiences that reduces the amount of their ability to really want to seek services. So by creating a youth centered process, making sure there's no wrong bore, that youth feel connected and be able to be connected to housing and services, we can support them sooner and quicker. So thank you for your time today.

Thank you. Are there any other Members of the public who wish to signify support? Seeing none. Are there any primary witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Thank you. We will turn it back to the Committee for comment. Ms. Reyes.

I just want to thank the Assemblymember who has been a champion, especially for youth - homeless youth, from his time back as a supervisor and even before that. And to have him be the author of this Bill is extremely important. So with that, I would move the Bill.

Thank you, Ms. Reyes. And seconded by Mr. Lee any other Members wishing to comment? Seeing none. Mr. Ramos, I want to thank you for bringing this Bill forward. Obviously, another opportunity to be able to focus on our youth population, a subset of homelessness that has special needs that are out there, and to be able to utilize our HAPP funding, knowing that we need to be having that conversation through the budget as well to guarantee additional support that is showing positive effect in California. We've been doing a better job than national, proportionally, on addressing youth homelessness, but we have a ways to go.

And so really codifying this and having a dedicated program, I appreciate your willingness to accept the Committee's amendments, to be able to have program improvements and make sure that we have an assessment tool, and that importantly, we're using lived experience for individuals to be able to advise us on best designing many of these programs. I know it's going to maximize the impact that we have. So with that, I invite you to close.

Well, thank you. And thank you for that. And thank you for continuing to lift up the voice of the homeless youth in the State of California. It's drastically needed. With that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Senator Ramos. Madam Secretary, call the roll.

Motion for this Bill do pass, as amended, to the Assembly Committee on Human Services. [Roll Call].

That passes. 9 to 0. Congratulations.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for your work. Next, we have assemblymember Irwin, and this is item number five, AB 20114. Assembly Member Irwin, you may begin when you're ready.

Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chair Members, I'm pleased to present AB 20114. Currently, California authorizes architects and structural engineers to perform balcony inspections for common interest developments. As a statutory deadline for these inspections quickly approaches, it's become clear that there is a lack of available inspectors to perform the necessary inspections to meet this deadline.

AB 20114 addresses this issue by authorizing civil engineers to perform these inspections. Civil engineers are highly qualified to perform the task, and authorizing them will increase the supply of eligible inspectors for this critical task. With me to testify in support of the bill is Louis Brown.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Committee, Louis Brown here today on behalf of the sponsor, the Community Associations Institute of California Legislative Actions Committee. I've been asked to quickly give the rational for why the statutes are different as it relates to common interest developments versus multi-family housing in the bill. When this bill was first moved forward by senator Hill, the two were combined. And through our work with senator Irwin and senator Hill we were able to separate common interest from this and run a separate bill.

One of the reasons we did that is just because, as many of you know, common interest developments are unique. And with this element of the bill, when it comes to balconies and exterior elevated elements, it's not only the repairs that we're looking at, but it's also the lifespan of these entities.

Common interest developments are required every three years to do a Reserve study of all the elements within a facility or within the building and plan for their useful life, and then make repairs pending what that useful life is. So knowing that we have to do that, we coordinated these inspections to be with the Reserve study. And then we looked to have design professionals, architects, structural engineers and civil engineers be the ones that conduct the inspections.

Because while we do want to address concerns, immediate concerns with construction if necessary, what we're really interested in is what the lifespan of those exterior elements are, so that we can work those into our reserve studies, we can plan for them better, and we can make those construction decisions going forward. So that's why we specifically put design professionals within our list of qualified inspectors and not the more inclusive list that you'll find for multifamily dwellings.

With that, happy to take any questions, and we ask for support. I've also been asked just to say a quick me too on behalf of the American Council of Civil Engineering Companies, thank you.

Thank you. And Members of the public in the room for support.

Good morning. Ferrari. Sylvio Ferrari, on behalf of the California Building Industry Association, in support, thank you.

Good morning. Chair and Members Kate Bell, on behalf of the California Rental Housing Association and the Apartment Association of Greater LA, in support, thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members Pat Moran, with Aaron Reed and associates representing the Southern California Rental Housing Association, in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing nobody else wishing to signify support, is there any Members with us that are primary opposition? Seeing none. Any Members of the public who wish to register their opposition and seeing none, we'll turn it back to Committee. Any Members wishing to address the bill? I know we have a motion for Mr. Grayson and seconded by Ms. Sanchez. Nobody wishing to comment.

Well, I want to thank you for introducing this bill. I think we've heard a lot about the need to be able to improve a safety for our balconies, especially after the horrible collapse that we saw in Berkeley, but other minor incidents that come up and the pool of available inspectors certainly is the heart of what you're trying to do here to expand that.

I still want to beg the question, though, knowing that we have an opportunity under hills legislation to have a broader pool of inspectors, licensed professionals of different classifications, that could provide more options. I'm still having trouble reconciling why that should be distinct or different for a CID, as opposed to a non HOA or a non CID building as well to your need. You've got your requirements and you want these inspections, and we certainly want qualified individuals to perform those inspections and sign off.

But why not have at your disposal a slightly larger option of professionals available to perform that? Knowing that we are in a place where we have a backlog, it takes too long to get somebody out there to do these inspections. Just offer this bill as an opportunity, as I think we've discussed through potential Committee amendments, to not have to have another bill next year to broaden it even further. A building is a building, whether it is governed by a CID or not. So why the rationale?

Well, the main rationale, Mr. Chairman, is the opportunity to build it within to our reserve studies. And if you'll look, there's a number of different elements between SB 326, SB 721, the level of inspection, the level of certainty. We ask for a stamped inspection report from these design professionals so that we can then turn those over to our reserve specialists and work those into our plan.

So the first bill by Assembly Senator Hill, SB 721, was really, really focused on getting to those real emergency situations and getting those fixed correctly. Because of the reserve studies, because of an Association that actually manages and oversees the condominiums, we haven't seen the same type of structural issues. So when we came back and looked at SB 326, we tried to make that fit into this overarching system of maintenance infrastructure financing that CIDs have.

And the importance of that element is those stamped certified plans with a certain level of certainty that only a design professional can provide.

Okay. We do have the ability under our code, though, for non CID governed properties to be able to have a slightly bigger pool of professionals that could perform the same work.

And my point is that just generally, and maybe this is my own philosophy, I don't like sort of two sets of standards that are out there knowing sometimes they need to exist when things I think are so directly important for CID governance. But in this case, it's a building inspection, and a physical structure is a physical structure. So I'd encourage the author to maybe think about this as it goes forward.

Respectfully ask for your. I vote. Thank you. We will continue the conversation.

Happy to very much support this, because we need the improvements out there through this legislation today. But just I'd like to see parity in our code. I think it's a smart way to do policy. So with that, this enjoys a dupas recommendation. We have a motion in a second, Madam Secretary. Call the roll. zero, I'm so sorry, madam. Would you like to close?

Motion is due to pass. [Roll Call]

[Roll Call]

And that Bill passes with 90. Thank you. Congratulations. And next, Assembly Member Juan Carrillo is with us to introduce item number six, AB 2140. And when you are ready, you may present your Bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members, thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 2140 a bill that would directly direct the state treasurer's office to create its own state led financing system that will create a new home for sale to working class families in East California's critical homeownership gap. Throughout the history of our state and our country, homeownership has been the most reliable stepping stone to create financial stability and wealth across generations.

And the reality is that we simply are not building enough homes that working families can afford to buy. The American dream of homeownership is out of reach for most Californians, particularly in black and brown communities. With African American and Latino homeownership, rates are 26% and 19% lower than white Californians. At this rate, it's hurting renters and crushing the hopes of our working families wishing to someday own their own home.

In being conscious of the multibillion dollar deficit we are currently facing, this bill takes a practical and meaningful approach to how we're moving the needle to increase housing production. As a city planner, I often saw projects entitled and never be built. This is why it is absolutely necessary to invest time and resources into a financial analysis and program structure in order to put forward a truly effective solution to our housing crisis.

A similar solution is also currently being considered at the federal level, called the Neighborhood Homes Investment act, or NHIA, a bipartisan bill that would create a new affordable homeownership financing system. One model of the successful low income housing tax credit. While the NHIA would be the first large scale affordable homeownership financing program in the country, as written, it would not be applicable to most neighborhoods in California due to our state's high land cost.

Many of the current financing programs, such as the low income housing tax credit, are reserved only for the production of rental housing. This program is more than 30 years old, and a new program model on its success would benefit from potential improvements and modifications to reflect the current economic climate and the unique challenges of for sale financing.

What exists to support homeownership today is primarily available in the form of a down payment assistance program, which are helpful and needed, but does not address the creation of new affordable homes for sale. In fact, the money in these down payment assistance programs could be stretched further if supply increased and the overall cost homes decreased. Joining me in support and to answer questions is Adam Briones with the California Community Builders and Esmeralda Lopez with Unidos.

Thank you. Good morning chair Ward and Members of the Committee. My name is Adam Brionis and I'm CEO of California Community Builders, a nonprofit working to close the racial wealth gap, focusing on housing and home ownership. I am here today as a proud co sponsor of AB 2140. Today, nowhere in the country consistently builds homes that low and moderate income families can afford. The reason is simple. Money to finance affordable homeownership construction does not exist at scale anywhere. AB 2140 is an important first step towards addressing this problem.

A study to establish a framework for how our state can create a new financing tool that maximizes homeownership opportunities for working families while minimizing taxpayer subsidy. And there's no reason to reinvent the wheel. This report will look at housing finance tools that already exist and can be adapted to the problem at hand.

When it comes to affordable rentals, we know we have a program that works well, and that's the low income housing tax credit program, commonly known as Litec, which finances 90% of affordable housing development in the US by leveraging a significant amount of private capital in the interest of ensuring that credit is given where credit's due. It's important to note that the Litec program was actually a product of the last President from California, former President Ronald Reagan and a democratic Congress working together.

Just as the Litech program has bipartisan roots, home ownership is a broadly shared value throughout California's diverse communities. We don't call home ownership the Democrat Dream or the Republican Dream. We call it the American Dream. AB 2140 represents one important step in helping hardworking families throughout the state make that dream a reality. Thank you for your consideration of this important measure, and I respectfully request your aye vote thank you.

Thank you. I'm Esmeralda Lopez. I'm the California Advocacy Director for UnidosUS. We're the nation's largest Latino civil rights and advocacy organization. And in addition to an office in Los Angeles and staff here in Sacramento. We have a network of affiliates that is 68 community based organizations throughout the State of California and I'm here as a proud co sponsor of AB 2140. Unidos US has had a long standing commitment to helping mortgage ready Latinos find and create a pathway to buy a home.

We do this because our research has shown that homeownership is one of the most powerful tools to closing the racial and ethnic wealth gap and also for creating financial stability for Latino families. However, our research has also shown that due to California's extreme housing shortage, this has put homeownership out of reach of money. In our recently released report titled Building California's Future Latino home ownership, UnidosUS found that there are 1.9 million Latinos that are 18 to 49 that are mortgage ready in the state.

However, we also found that for years, prices of homes have been rising at a much faster rate than incomes. In that report, we also found that the home ownership rate for Latinos is 18 percentage points lower in the State of California than that of the white population, and it is 4% lower than the national homeownership rate for Latinos. Additionally, Unidos has found that entry level homes and condos are among the most underbuilt in the state.

In a recent released poll that we conducted of California Latino voters, we found that housing costs has risen to be one of the top concerns for Latino voters in the State of California. Notably, 71% of those surveyed in this report found that home affordability was the number one barrier that they identified for homeownership. AB 2140 is necessary to study the best way to create home ownership financing programs to build more accessible homes and address the homeownership gap in California.

Thank you for your consideration and I respectfully request your support for AB 2140. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other Members of the public wishing to signify support.

Chair and Members of the Committee, Jordan Perana Carvahad, legislative advocate for California, Yimby in strong support. Thank you so much.

Hello. Seamus Gerrity from Lighthouse public affairs. I am here on behalf of Power California Spur and Habitat for Humanity California, in very strong support. Thank you.

And are there any primary witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Any Members of the public in opposition and seeing none. We can turn this back to Committee, Mr. Zbur.

So I just want to thank you, Senator Carillo, for bringing this really important bill. And I want to thank the two bill sponsors and those that are supporting. Know, I look at my own family. My father was a high school dropout, went to college, was the only person in his family that went to college because of the GI Bill. My mom never graduated from high school, did not have a single person among her siblings that went to college at all. And they both worked hard.

My dad went to school and were able to buy a house. And it was the fact that they built that equity in home ownership that allowed, when, after my father died and my mother was older, allowed her to have a cushion that supplemented her Social Security and some modest retirement benefits that she and my father had earned. And so homeownership really is one of the ways that is a social justice issue, frankly.

And when we're thinking about housing, we need to be thinking about housing in all forms, both rental and homeownership. But we really need to be providing pathways from rental housing into homeownership. And this bill does that. And I just want to thank you for doing that. I think it's incredibly important, and we'll be strongly supporting the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. As a proud co author of this bill, I want to also echo my colleagues comments. My father with a 6th grade education, my mother with a third grade education also worked very hard. And the generational wealth came from buying their first home. They do remind me whenever I tell the story, my mother says, please tell them it only cost $1,000, but they bought their first home. And then from there we're able to buy a number of pieces of property, and that is my mother's wealth, and it will become generational wealth. This is so important.

And we've shut the door on so many people, especially our young people, but low income people primarily. And the statistics are absolutely accurate. Latinos and blacks lag behind when it comes to home ownership. And whatever we can do to try to find that path, this is the first step. We're not saying get everybody at home. We're saying, let's take the first step.

Let's have our treasurer put together this report so we know what we're doing next, and then we take the next step next year and next year. So I really appreciate this bill and your sponsorship. This is really important. It's an important first step. And with that, I would move the Bill.

Thank you, Ms. Reyes. Mr. Zbur seconds. Ms. Senator Wilson.

Thank you to the author. I'm proud to be a co author of this legislation as well, this bill. And I'd just like to note in echoing remarks from my colleagues in regard to the importance of home ownership, especially when, as you noted in your opening remarks, as it relates to black and black communities, as chair of the legislative Black Caucus, we are doing this work around reparations and really restoring the harms, restoring people to dignity from the harms of years, of generations of discrimination and racism.

And part of that has to do with property, as well as ensuring that our Black Californians have ability to invest in their future by investing in a home and having ownership and equity. And so I think that's extremely important. I'm so glad that you're doing this bill and looking for innovative ways.

One of the parts that I love about this bill is looking for it to be sustainable, that not completely reliant on government subsidies, because, as we know, especially with this year and last year and the years prior, swinging from surplus to deficits, have a definite impact on our ability to fund critical programs that allow the most vulnerable among us and allow investments in our future for families to have economic mobility.

So I appreciate you authoring this bill and those that provided testimony in regard to it, look forward to supporting it and whatever tweaks that need to be made to make sure it gets across the finished line. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Wilson and Senator Member Grayson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And to the author, thank you very much for this bill. I agree with the comments by my colleagues, and I just wanted to state that sometimes when we do a bill that is along the lines of a study bill, there are times when consideration is not given to timing. And what happens is the Legislature ends up boxing themselves into a period of time of inaction when we could have been taking parallel action while a study was being done. This is obviously not the case.

In this particular case, your bill, you've been very wise at crafting it, to make it so that everything is moving forward together at the same time addressing a very important subject. So I really appreciate your effort and consideration to timing and the essence of the bill itself as far as housing and homeownership. So thank you. I'll be supporting it today. Thank you. Mr. Grayson, Vice Chair, Patterson. Great. Thank you. Something you won't hear every day, but I totally agree with comments from Mr. Zbur.

Great. Thank you. Something you won't hear every day, but I totally agree with comments from Mr. Zbur. They're well taken. And also, Mr. Grayson, I think recently there was a report that only about half of the studies that the Legislature directs to occur actually ever get released. So hopefully we can stay on top of that. But just a couple of other comments. We need to do things, obviously, just to lower the cost of housing in general.

I know you realize that, I know people on this Committee realize that a lot of the programs would be completely unnecessary if we actually increase supply of housing, something the Governor committed as a goal himself, which was originally three and a half million homes and went to two and a half million homes. We have some jurisdictions charging $50 to $70,000 for just park fees.

I bought my first house when I was 26 years old, 2500 sqft, like twice the size of the house I grew up in. And I don't feel like 26 year olds have that same opportunity in other families as well. And I think that's a big problem. I do think just kind of like, put it on record.

I think the Legislature has done a great job in coming up with programs and goals, not all of them that I've agreed with, but in general, taking a leadership position on trying to solve this housing crisis. But we need leadership from the Administration on this to accomplish his goal of two and a half million homes. And we're falling woefully short of that for a variety of reasons. But this is a small bite at the apple.

I think owning a home is the American dream and things that we can do to lower the cost of homeownership. I love to see the study. We're not committing to anything, but I think this is a good opportunity to take a look at some of the things we can do to increase homeownership. So thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Vice Chair Patterson, seeing no other Members wishing to comment. Mr. Korea, I want to thank you for bringing this program Bill forward.

Certainly, we have our work to do on the fiscal side to make sure that it can be funded. But just gently getting out there and looking at ways to be able to increase homeownership opportunities for those that are historically underserved, it's hard enough for any Californian to be able to purchase home today.

It's triply hard for those that have endured the disadvantages that they've had to be able to get their foot in the door and really try to see a piece of the American dream as well. So I want to thank you for focusing on that through this program. The bill enjoys a do pass recommendation, and with that, invite you to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and for all the comments and all the Committee Members. We appreciate the comments you made.

And we know that there is no silver bullet solution to the housing affordability crisis that we're living, but working and taking small bites of the apple. As Mr. Patterson said, we will be able to find that solution. AB 21 photo represents a meaningful, responsible step towards bringing the dream of homeownership, but within the reach of working families. And with that, I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you, sir.

Thank you so Member. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Motion to pass to the Assembly Committee and appropriations Ward. [Roll Call]

That bill is currently 8-0. We'll hold it open for absent members, but it's looking good. Thank you. Next, we have Assembly Member Wendy Carillo, who is bringing us item number eight, which is AB 2278. When you are ready, you may begin presenting your bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. And Mr. Chair, congratulations on Chairing Housing Committee. I miss you guys. It's a pleasure to join you all today. I'm here to present AB 2278, which will require the Office of the Attorney General to publish the maximum allowable rent increase for each metropolitan area under the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, which I was also a proud coauthor of on its website.

By July 1 of each year, existing law establishes an annual cap on rent increases at 5% plus inflation, or 10%, whichever is lower. The rent cap is essential in protecting tenants, as 50% of renters and 80% of low-income renters are rent-burdened, meaning that they are paying more than 30% of their income on rent at the expense of life's other essentials. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics and California Department of Industrial Relations calculate changes in the consumer price index by region to determine inflation.

A property owner or tenant would need to know where to locate that data and then add the figure to 5% to determine which standard applies. The lack of easily accessible public resources contributes to the confusion around what is allowable under the Tenant Protection Act. By requiring the Attorney General's Office to publish the maximum allowable rent increase, we will provide tenants a tool to quickly verify whether their rent increase is legal and a tool for property owners to comply with the law.

The bill is sponsored by the California Rental Housing Association, and there is no opposition. I'd also like to thank the California Apartment Association for working with my office very early on to ensure that we were being fair to both sides. The testimony and support on AB 2278 is Legislative Chair Adam Pearce on behalf of the California Rental Housing Association.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair, fellow housing community members. My name is Adam Pearce and I'm the Legislative Chair for the California Rental Housing Association.

We represent approximately 25,000 members across the state. These are housing providers that are primarily the small mom and pop folks that might have bought a duplex for hopefully their future retirement one day. I would like to thank the sssembly member for bringing this bill forward and authoring it and primarily also being an advocate for small property owners across the state. As she said, current law does provide housing providers to increase rent across a 12 month period, 5% plus the cost of living index.

They're to use the metropolitan index that their house resides under or their property resides under. However, confusion does come up, and it's something that we get all the time: how much can I increase rent? They certainly don't want to be in trouble and they don't want to go above what they're allowed to do. This bill would help alleviate that confusion. A lot of our members don't have the support of large financial or large institutions that are management companies. They self manage their properties.

They don't even know, potentially, where to find the cost of living index. So this would be an opportunity for them to know where to get the information from the attorney general's website, posted each year, routinely, so that no mistakes are made. I do think this is a win for both housing providers as well as residents, so that when they do receive that increased notice, they know whether or not that is allowable by law. So, I respectfully ask for your aye vote and thank you for your time.

Thank you. Are there any members of the public in support?

Thank you, Kate Bell, on behalf of the California Rental Housing Association and the Department Association of Greater Los Angeles, in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, members: Pat Moran with Aaron Reed and Associates representing the Southern California Rental Housing Association in support. And with regard to the suggested amendments in support of those two. Moving it to July June 15 would even be better, but we support that as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any primary witnesses in opposition and seeing none. Any members of the public here in opposition? Okay. Seeing none, we'll bring that back to the committee for any comments or questions. And Mr. Zbur moves the bill. Mr. Lee, here a second.

Ms. Carillo, I want to thank you for bringing this forward, as well working with our committee to kind of figure out where to house this important information. It was a big question when I was down in my district over the fall for those that, of course, over the last couple of years, we've seen incredible increases in rent, and whether or not to know the AB 1482 provisions have been violated was difficult to figure out. We see this published in the paper.

We know industry is able to make those calculations, but it was always an open question about what to do. And we came to learn that our Attorney General has really been a champion and helpful in building up his office's efforts to be able to make sure that everybody is following the law through his unit. So it makes all the sense in the world that they obviously have to have their own calculations and benchmarks to know if the law has been violated.

And if somebody is a, I guess, public service announcement, if somebody is of question that they are being inappropriately seeing their rent raised in violation of AB 1482. Addressing the Attorney General's Office is the place to go, but we want to make sure that the information is sort of centralized and that seems the appropriate location for that to reside. So, I want to thank you for codifying this with that and invite you to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Be remiss without saying thank you to your staff as well as that we are accepting the committee amendments. Did not mention that in my opening remarks. And again, thank you, and transparency, accountability, and protection to small mom-and-pop landlords, very important to us. We just want everybody to comply with the law and know where to go. So this is a step in the right direction. And with that, I respectfully request an aye vote.

Thank you, Ms. Carrillo. Madam Secretary, you may call the roll.

Motion do pass as amended to the Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

And we are at 7-0. We will hold that role open for absent colleagues. I want to thank you for your presentation today.

Thank you.

With that, we do have one more author, and I'm aware that she is chairing another committee.

I'll invite her staff to let her know that we'll take her as soon as she's able to make it down. But we have Ms. Reyes, that is able to present her bill. And while she is getting settled, I will entertain a motion on the consent item, which is items numbers 1, 2, and 7, moved by Ms. Wilson, seconded by Mr. Kalra. With that, Madam Secretary, please call a roll.

We are at 7-0. We'll hold that roll open for absent committee members. And Ms. Reyes, you are here with item number 10, AB 2396.

Item number one, AB 7082, do pass to the Assembly Committee of Local Government. Item number two, AB 1878, do pass to the Assembly Committee of Appropriations, and item number seven, AB 2044, Grayson: do pass to the Assembly Committee of Local Government. [Roll Call].

Thank you for presenting this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. I also want to thank the staff for working with my team and my sponsors and I will be accepting the committee's amendments. AB 2396 will create the State Partnership for Affordable Housing Registries in the California grant program, also known as SPARK. The SPARK grant program will require the Department of Housing and Community Development to administer the program and award grants to local or regional agencies to develop online portals of affordable housing listings, information and applications.

According to California Housing Partnership, recent estimates demonstrate that California has over 500,000 deed-restricted, multifamily affordable housing rental units. While these units may be available, they are not always accessible. Individuals and families searching for affordable rental units are forced to search on various posting sites. These sites often do not tailor their search accurately for renters and may even display both nonsubsidized housing and affordable housing options. By having to search on various websites, renters often apply for multiple listing options they do not qualify for on a multitude of sites, leading to a duplication of efforts and a delay in the renter's path to housing. AB 2396 would create a housing data platform to streamline systems and connect renters and families to deed-restricted affordable housing units they qualify for. Here to testify and support and answer any technical questions are Lauren Rebrovich with Housing California and Cathy Eberhardt from the Residents United Network.

Thank you. Welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members, as well as Assembly Member Reyes, for authorizing authoring AB 2396. My name is Cathy Eberhardt, and I am a run member of the Housing California Board of Directors and pebble member. I was homeless for 18 months. I spent literally over 50 hours a week trying to identify who builds affordable housing. I spent over $100 a month on bus fare just to canvas the City of Oakland trying to find these affordable housing developers and apartments.

I made several calls a day, also trying to determine who is affordable versus market-rate housing. This is the 21st century. You could Google market rate apartments like Zillow and apartments.com. Why not a portal for affordable housing? Thank you for listening.

Thank you.

Awesome. Well, thank you so much to the Chair and committee members for having us here today. My name is Lauren Rebrovich, and I'm with Housing California, and we're sponsoring today's bill. So, just to kind of reiterate some of the points that the Member already made, California has over 500,000 deed-restricted affordable housing units, but the process to find and apply for them is incredibly outdated.

While people can search on the private market with Zillow or Apartments.com, there's no centralized place for you to look for affordable units. And as a result, low-income households have to search for affordable housing across various sites, sometimes walking or driving through their communities or just simply hearing about things through word of mouth. Renters also as a result of this, may be unaware for units that they actually qualify for.

They might apply to units that do not meet their needs, and they also apply for the same listing on multiple sites, causing excess fees. And they might even give up the search altogether, resulting in ending up in a home that's not adequate for their income. So, by creating online portals of affordable housing listings and information, AB 2396 would make it far easier for low-income Californians to find and apply for affordable housing.

Additionally, awarding these grants to local or regional public agencies will enable platforms that are efficient and responsive to the local conditions. These portals will save residents time and effort. They'll help them learn about housing options outside of their neighborhood, which we feel is very important to affirmatively furthering fair housing efforts, and it'll provide important housing data. So, given all this, there's also a strong precedent for these portals. San Francisco launched in 2016 their DAHLIA program, and that moves 97% of affordable housing applications online.

And in 2023, the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority also launched a similar tool for the Bay Area. And we're seeing that there's been commitments made in Los Angeles for a portal. So AB 2396 will ensure that these low income residents in other parts of the state are also afforded the same opportunity to view housing listings on their platforms, and it will make it less expensive for those jurisdictions because the current technology is quite costly. So, for those reasons, I urge your aye vote on AB 2396.

Appreciate your testimony. Any members of the public wishing to signify support? One second, please.

Mr. Chairman, members: Rand Martin, on behalf of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation and then Healthy Housing Foundation, and very strong support of this very helpful bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any primary witnesses? In opposition and seeing none. Any members of the public here? In opposition? Seeing none. We'll turn this back to committee.

Any members wishing to make a motion or comment? Mr. Grayson moves. Ms. Sanchez seconds the motion. Ms. Reyes, really appreciate this reintroduction of the bill. Mr. Zbur, my apologies.

I just wanted to thank the author for bringing the bill. And I just wanted to thank the witness today, I think, for really driving home, really, some of the obstacles that people have, especially folks that are unhoused and fising affordable housing. On one hand, you hear about this thing.

On paper, it seems like it makes sense, but I think sort of coming today and giving people a sense of really how hard it really is for people on the ground to find housing and why this is needed was really helpful to me. So, I just wanted to thank you both for being here.

Thank you.

Thank you. I underscore those comments as well. Really appreciate your reintroduction of this bill. I was happy to support it, of course, last time. And I know we have to work on the fiscal aspects of it as well, but from a policy perspective, we need it. We are fortunate in my city, in the City of San Diego, we have a housing commission that has this list. Of course, we don't have enough affordable housing to be on that list.

We're working on that so that there are more options for individuals. But it's hard enough to find something if you don't sort of have a centralized database to kind of know when you need it, where to go. So to make sure that all Californians have an opportunity for this as well. This program is vitally necessary, and I appreciate your leadership. Madam Reyes, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Motion do pass as amended to the Assembly Committee of Appropriations. [Roll Call]

And that bill passes 9-0. It is out. Thank you. I'll put in another call as well, to Assembly Member Pellerin's office. I know that she is triple booked this morning, but we have her bill to present.

In the meantime, Mr. Vice Chair, if you're kind, I'll turn the gavel over to you so I can present my bill. Okay. I'll take what I get. The bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members; I'm here to present Assembly Bill 2005, which, as you all know, according to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, 16% of residents in California can afford to buy a home. And California renters also have the nation's second-highest rent burdens.

It's the lack of access to affordable housing which has led to greater difficulty in recruitment and retention to diverse and quality staff. Now, we've had exciting leadership to be able to expand some of our options, to be able to use some of our educational properties in ways, through previous legislation, to be able to support, particularly teacher and student housing development. We've passed legislation that has been able to support both K12 workforce as well as the community college district.

And this bill, Assembly 2005, would allow the CSU to utilize the low-income housing tax credit to create more affordable housing for our amazing staff and faculty. Given the rising cost of housing in California, AB 2005 is especially crucial to enable the CSU system to support its faculty and staff with affordable housing options.

And I have here with us today from my district, Agnes Wong Nickerson, the Vice President for Business and Financial Affairs and the CFO for San Diego State University, and Adriana Gomez as well, and would look forward to their testimony.

Okay. Good morning.

Great, thank you. We have two minutes, by the way. I got to run a tight ship like the chairman does.

Okay. All right. So, good morning, Chair Ward and committee members. As Chair Ward mentioned, my name is Agnes Wong Nickerson.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on AB 2005, a bill that will play a critical role in helping the CSU address the housing needs of our 53,000 members of faculty and staff. US News and World Report recently listed San Diego as the most expensive place to live in the US. The average rent of a two-bedroom apartment is $2,855 per month in San Diego. In comparison, the national average monthly rent of a two-bedroom apartment is just a little bit over $300.

The lack of affordable housing options near campus not only strained the finances of faculty and staff but also contributed to long commutes, increased traffic congestion, and, ultimately, a lower quality of life. As a system, we also risk losing talent to individuals, to other states and industries, potentially undermining the academic excellence and innovative research capabilities of our 23 universities.

This bill seeks to help address these challenges by extending to the CSU the same ability to compete for low-income housing credits as K-12 and community colleges. It also allows the CSU to prioritize occupancy of the affordable rental units to our faculty and staff when built on university-owned land. This measure will also have the impact of opening up land on CSU-owned property for housing development.

In effect, AB 2005 empowers CSU to take positive steps to build on our efforts to provide affordable housing options to our faculty and staff, aligning with our commitment to foster a stable, supportive, and inclusive work environment. On behalf of SDSU and 22 other campuses in our system, I respectfully urge you to support this bill, recognizing the profound impact the availability of affordable housing will have on the vitality and success of our dedicated employees. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Hello, everyone. Adriana Gomez here with the CSU Office of the Chancellor, here to support with technical questions.

Great. Thank you. Any other witnesses in support?

Mary Ellen Shay with the California Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies. Strong support. Look forward to working with our education partners.

Thank you. Any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. Comments from committee? Mr. Zbur.

I just want to thank the author. I represent an area that has both Santa Monica College and UCLA.

I know it's not a Cal State system, but I know how important these programs are, not only to making sure that our faculty members and students actually have housing security and don't have to think about housing so much and can focus on teaching kids and learning, but also opening up housing in the community that they otherwise would have taken. So these are really important programs.

Thank you. Any other comments? All right, just for me, for consistency sake, there have been bills that have come through in the past that have given tax credits to specific groups. I guess you could say that I've had concerns with just because, obviously, there's a huge need out there.

I know that our chair has been one of the leaders in this area for many, many years, and I just want to thank you because I know how important these programs are.

So, I'd love to continue those conversations as bill goes forward. But I'm a proud CSU grad myself, and I think it could be an interesting way, know, with the budget situation, know, to maybe help get some housing and relief and things like that. It's not necessarily salary-based, right? But it's another way to maybe bring down the cost so people can teach. But look forward to continuing conversations, and if you would like to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Which campus? CSU?

Sac state?

Sac state.

We didn't do the whole stingers-up thing when I went there, but that's what they do now.

No, I appreciate that. And to be clear, of course, this bill does not direct that LIHTC is going to be able to go out of properties, but allows them to compete for LIHTC. And that's important to be able to open up some of these options because it is a useful resource.

I would put in a plug as well, as we're considering some of the fiscal impacts that the reduction of our affordable housing tax credits to the tune of $500 million is something that would prevent opportunities like this from being able to enhance and support our staff and our faculty and ultimately keep our CSU systems competitive on the national stage for the world-class institutions that they are. I respectfully ask for your aye vote great.

Thank you. Please take roll.

Motion to pass to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education. [Roll Call]

Mr. Chair, your bill is out.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. That was 7-0 with two abstentions in the record, and our last bill is by Assembly Member Pellerin, and this is item number nine. AB 2387 look forward to your presentation. Great.

Great.

Thank you, Chair and members, I will first accept the committee's amendments, which clarify that this bill will apply to all cities, including charter cities. Mobile home parks and manufactured homes provide hundreds of thousands of housing units in California, often at more affordable prices than other options. Because they are less expensive and faster to construct than traditional site-built houses, they can be a key component of addressing the housing crisis.

However, in some areas, local permitting processes and excessive fees charged for adding lots in existing mobile home parks can reach tens of thousands of dollars per lot being added, making mobile home park expansions cost-prohibitive. AB 2387 allows California's existing mobile home parks to apply to local government, local enforcement agencies to increase their number of lots by up to 10% and incentivizes increases in mobile home spaces by exempting added spaces from additional business taxes and local fees.

The bill safeguards in the bill ensure that additional spaces do not substantially impact the provision of water, sewage, electrical, gas, and other utility services within the park. By enabling these modest extensions, AB 2387 will provide housing that is more affordable to many Californians. With me to testify in support today is John Moffatt, who is representing the California Manufactured Housing Institute.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. John Moffatt, on behalf of the California Manufactured Housing Institute, we are the trade association for the builders and sellers of manufactured homes in California. Almost the same exact bill got out of the assembly with no "no" votes and no opposition last year and then ran into some unexpected snags in Senate Appropriations. So we appreciate the assembly member for taking this up again this year, and hopefully, we can get it all the way through.

I think, obviously, this committee doesn't need to know is already very familiar with the housing issues here in the State of California. We think manufactured homes and existing mobile home parks on their existing footprints have an opportunity to take land that isn't currently being used and turn those into lots for new homes. The impediments of the past, in addition to state regulation by HCD over these mobile home parks, has also been the additional layer of local regulation, local fees.

This bill is taking a page from the previous bills that have gone through regarding ADUs and other things and saying, "Well, if we've got a footprint that's available, let's streamline that process. Let's reduce the costs and get more homes put in these areas." Happy to answer any questions you may have and ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Are there any other members of the public in support?

Mr. Chair and members: Chris Wysocki with WMA. We represent the Mobile home park owners, the vast majority of them in California, and we want to thank the author for introducing this bill again. We believe that increasing the housing supply in California is an essential public policy goal of the Legislature. And while we do support the bill, we would like to keep working with the author to secure some additional amendments to allow us to actually open up facilities and areas inside existing mobile home parks for which we charge RVs, storage, boat storage.

Good morning, Chair and members. Brian Augusta, on behalf of the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, not here today in formal opposition.

If we charge for them and they're not included as an amenity under the space rent, we'd like to make it more possible to build homes on those sites than store RVs and boats. But thank you, Assemblywoman, and thank you, members, and urgent, aye vote.

Thank you. I'll consider that second statement in support. Any other members of the public in support? Seeing none. Any primary witnesses in opposition?

We've had good conversations with the author and her sponsor, but I did want to take this opportunity to explain our concerns with the bill because they are also echoed in some of the opposition letters that the committee has received, which didn't make it in time, it seems, for the analysis, but most of you should be in receipt of, and those reflect our concern not with the policy that was just described, which I think a number of us are very comfortable with, but the unintended consequences of it in its intersection with existing law.

And those are two key things which I don't think interfere with the author's intent and the sponsor's intent. And we're hopeful we can resolve. The first is that because it would allow for the placement of a multifamily manufactured home on an existing space under current law, the conversion or creation of new spaces could potentially be interpreted under existing law to result in that space being pulled out of local rent control, which I know is not something that the author wants to see.

And so we want to clarify that that is not new construction under the existing law. The other related provision is that under existing law, a homeowner or homeowners in a park can be evicted under the mobile home residency law in only a few specific instances. But one of them is the closure or partial closure of a park. And so we want to clarify that the conversion of these units doesn't constitute a partial closure that could result in the eviction of existing tenants.

So with those two potential amendments, which we have offered to the author, we would be very comfortable with the bill. And so we're hopeful that we can work that out as it moves forward. And I acknowledge that this bill was presented last year, but these issues have come up, so we're hoping we can resolve them. Thank you.

Appreciate your comments today. Any other members of the public in opposition? I see none. We'll bring this back to committee. Ms. Reyes?

I want to thank the author for bringing it back. When the bill makes it through our house, there's no reason it shouldn't get to the governor's desk. And it's a good bill. I appreciate that you're bringing it back, and I'm sure that this time, it'll make it through senator probes. Thank you. With that, I would move the Bill.

Thank you. Senator Reyes, is there a second? Second by Grace Chair Patterson, and you have a comment?

Yes, I've, too, had snags in Senate Appropriation, so I wish you luck when this gets there. I think this is a really great bill, and if I was a city still on a city council, I think the league of cities and cities should be supporting this bill because it's an excellent way to meet requirements for your housing element and things like that.

Thank you. Okay. With that, I also want to just echo the comments of our colleagues that I think, I appreciate your willingness to be able to bring this bill back forward.

If you have these parks in your community, which most cities do, by adding units and delivering those units, I think this should be like supported by local government, I guess, is what I'm saying. So anyways, great bill. Looking forward to supporting it, and thanks for trying again.

Wish you luck, as we all do going through Senate Appropriations, but it's important, I think, to have the options here that we're trying to work with our mobile home park owners to be able to use existing capacity just a little bit better. And I appreciate your willingness to be able to work to make sure that there's no unintended consequences as to still move forward. So with that, there's a motion and a second to do pass as amended. Madam Secretary. Oh, excuse me. Would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Madam Secretary, call the roll.

Motion do pass as amended to the Committee of Appropriations. [Roll Call]

That bill passes out with 9-0. Thank you very much, Ms. Pellerin. With that, we will go back and clean up a few missing votes. We will begin with item number six, AB 2140. Madam Secretary.

[Roll Call]

That Bill is out. 80 with one.

Not voting. Item number eight, AB 2278.

[Roll Call]

That Bill is out with 9-0. And then our consent calendar items numbers 1,2, and 7. Madam Secretary.

Consent calendar items. Yes. Consent calendar is out, 9-0. With that, we are adjourned.

[Roll Call]. So that would be nice there.