2024 California Housing Legislative Update

California is still facing a housing affordability crisis. According to the U.S. Federal Reserve, the median listing price of homes in California in September 2024 was $768,000, more than 83% higher than the national median of $425,000. Of course, the median listing price in Los Angeles County is considerably higher, $1,057 million. The California Public Policy Institute recently found that an incredible 34% of Californians have seriously considered leaving the state because of high housing costs. 

Over the past three legislative cycles, the California Legislature played a significantly more active role in housing policy. Many of these bills require municipalities to streamline the local development process. To date, these bills have had mixed success in producing more housing in California. 

In 2024, the California Legislature continues to advance bills intended to spur housing production and ultimately reduce housing costs in the state. Below, you will find summaries of the real estate-related legislation that Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law. These summaries rely heavily on examination from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office. 

Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns about these bills or would like to discuss how Loeb can assist you. 

Table of Contents

Signed Bills

• Streamlining Development; Ministerial Approvals
• State Mandates on Local Jurisdictions
• Local Governance
• Parking
• Density Bonus
• Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
• Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
• Affordable Housing and Homelessness
• Fire and Building Standards
• Homeowners Association and Landlord-Tenant Law

Streamlining Development; Ministerial Approvals

AB 1893 (Wicks): The bill prohibits local municipalities from disapproving a “builder’s remedy project” if the local government’s housing element was not in substantial compliance with the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) on the date the builder’s remedy project application was “deemed complete.” In relevant part, a “builder’s remedy project” is defined as (1) a project that includes housing for very low-, low- or moderate-income households; (2) the project was “deemed complete” on or after the relevant local jurisdiction did not have a substantially compliant housing element; and (3) the project complies with certain generous density standards.

The affordability requirement under this statutory builder’s remedy is as follows:

(a) 100% of the units, excluding the manager’s unit, are affordable to lower-income households.

(b) 7% of the units are affordable to extremely low-income households.

(c) 10% of the units are affordable to very low-income households.

(d) 13% of the total units are affordable to lower-income households.

(e) 100% of the total units are affordable to moderate-income households.

Until Jan. 1, 2030, a project is “deemed complete” when the “applicant has submitted a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 of the Government Code or, if the applicant has not submitted a preliminary application, has submitted a complete application pursuant to Section 65943 of the Government Code. 

The project must have a density such that the number of units, as calculated before the application of a density bonus, such that the density does not exceed the following densities:

(a) 50% greater than the minimum density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for that jurisdiction.

(b) Three times the density allowed by the general plan, zoning ordinance or state law, whichever is greater.

(c) The density that is consistent with the density specified in the housing element.

AB 1893’s findings state that the legislation is “intended to provide greater clarity of existing law, and should not be interpreted as constraints on or impediments to processing current ‘builder’s remedy’ project applications deemed complete.” 

AB 2243 (Wicks): This bill expands and modifies the scope of the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022 (AB 2011) and the Middle Class Housing Act of 2022 (SB 6). AB 2011 allows housing development in areas zoned for parking, retail or office buildings and provides eligible developments with a streamlined, ministerial approval process. That means eligible developments in commercial zones and along commercial corridors are exempt from most local approval processes and review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) —provided that the project meets affordability, labor and other standards specified in the bill. AB 2243 expands AB 2011’s geographic applicability and clarifies aspects of the law that are currently subject to local interpretation. This bill also narrows the scope of commercial land that is eligible for streamlined development to exclude certain sensitive coastal zone sites. 

AB 2243 expands AB 2011’s streamlining procedure to: (1) existing high-rise districts, even if the site is not along a commercial corridor; and (2) sites within 500 feet of freeways, as long as certain requirements are met. Further, the legislation states that a developer utilizing the streamlined approval process must comply with a local government’s affordability requirement if that local requirement is deeper than the affordability requirement under state law. Finally, the bill establishes a schedule for a local government to determine if a project is consistent with applicable standards within 60 or 90 days.

The bill also broadens SB 6, which provides that a housing development project is an allowable use on a parcel that is within a zone where office, retail or parking is a principally permitted use if the proposed development complies with certain requirements, including labor requirements. Under that act, one of those requirements is that the project site be 20 acres or less. Under the new legislation, a regional mall that is less than 100 acres qualifies for these SB 6 provisions. SB 6 projects are still subject to CEQA requirements. 

AB 3122 (Kalra): In 2023, SB 423 (Wiener) amended SB 35 (Wiener) to create a streamlined, ministerial local approval process for housing development proposals in jurisdictions that have failed to produce sufficient housing to meet their regional housing needs allocations (RHNA). To access the by-right process, the project must meet several requirements, including that the development includes a percentage of affordable housing units, meets specified labor standards, is not on an environmentally sensitive site and would not result in the demolition of existing housing. Localities can provide design reviews and apply their own objective development standards, but they must approve the development project within specified time frames. 

This bill authorizes a local government to apply objective planning standards adopted after an approved SB 423/SB 35 development application was first submitted when a developer requests to modify the project in one of the following ways:

(1) The total square footage of the development increases by 15% or more, exclusive of underground space, or the total number of units decreases by 15% or more; or

(2) The total square footage of the development increases by 5% or more, exclusive of underground space, or the total number of units decreases by 5% or more. The local government deems it necessary to subject the development to new standards that were not in effect when it was first proposed to reduce specific harm to public health or safety, with no feasible alternative method to mitigate the adverse impact.

The legislation also provides that projects with at least 500 units can receive SB 423/SB 35 streamlining if they dedicate 20% of the units as affordable, with at least 9% of affordable units provided to households making at or below 50% Area Median Income (AMI) and the remainder making at or below 80% AMI. It also establishes a 30-day planning review time frame that local governments must follow when a development proponent submits project revisions to address written feedback provided by the local government. Furthermore, this bill clarifies that an SB 423 project application for a subdivision under the Subdivision Map Act is exempt from CEQA, provided the project meets all provisions of SB 423 and local objective standards and is a project in specified infill areas or a low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) project.

SB 1123 (Caballero): This bill expands SB 684 (2023), which required a local agency to ministerially approve, not subject to CEQA, the subdivision of a parcel map for up to 10 housing units. The bill expands SB 684 streamlining to include vacant single-family-zoned residential sites. A lot is considered vacant if it has no permanent structure unless the permanent structure is abandoned and uninhabitable. A single-family vacant lot must be no larger than one-and-a half acres. 

SB 450 (Atkins): This bill provides that an application for a duplex or a lot split must be considered and approved or denied by the local agency within 60 days from the date the local agency receives a completed application. If the local agency has not approved or denied the application within 60 days, the application is deemed approved. If a local agency denies an application for a duplex or lot split, the permitting agency must provide, in writing, a full set of comments to the application, with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the applicant can remedy the application. It also removes the ability of a local agency to deny a proposed duplex or lot split because the local agency has found that it would have a specific, adverse impact on the physical environment.

AB 3057 (Wilson): This bill expands an existing CEQA exemption for city or county adoption of an ordinance to facilitate accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and to include adoption of an ordinance facilitating junior ADUs (JADUs).

AB 1413 (Ting): Establishes a minimum 60-day time frame in the HAA for local agencies to consider objections, comments and evidence related to determining whether an HAA-protected housing development project is exempt from CEQA.

AB 2199 (Berman): The legislation extends the Jan. 1, 2025 sunset on the CEQA exemption for multifamily residential and mixed-use housing projects on infill sites in unincorporated areas until Jan. 1, 2032, and excludes projects that may cause a substantial adverse impact to tribal cultural resources.

AB 1801 (Jackson): This bill allows administrative office space to be included in the nonresidential floor area of a proposed supportive housing project seeking to utilize a by-right process.

SB 312 (Wiener): The bill relaxes several conditions attached to CEQA for public university housing projects established by SB 886 (Wiener) in 2022. For University of California (UC) housing projects, the bill revises the requirement that projects must be consistent with the university’s most recent long-range development plan (LRDP) environmental impact report (EIR), instead requiring the project to be located on a site identified for housing in the EIR and either within the range of housing units or beds analyzed for that site, if the EIR identifies such a range, or within the total housing units or beds analyzed in the EIR.

AB 3276 (Ramos): This bill ratifies a gaming compact between the state of California and the Tule River Indian Tribe of California. Pursuant to the Tule River Compact, in deference to tribal sovereignty, certain actions related to the compact are not deemed projects for purposes of CEQA.

State Mandates on Local Jurisdictions

SB 937 (Wiener): This bill regulates fees for certain streamlined or affordable housing. It requires local agencies to comply with various conditions when imposing fees, exactions or charges as a condition of approval of a proposed development.

Specifically, it prohibits a local agency that imposes fees or charges on residential development for the construction of public improvements or facilities from requiring the payment of those fees or charges until the date of the final inspection or the date the certificate of occupancy is issued, whichever occurs first, except for utility service fees, which the local agency is authorized to collect at the time an application for utility service is received. The local agency may only charge what would have been paid had the developer been charged prior to the issuance of building permits.

AB 1820 (Schiavo): Establishes a process through which development proponents can request preliminary project fees and exaction estimates when submitting a preliminary application and receive a final good faith estimate of all fees and exactions related to the project after final approval within 30 business days of the preliminary application.

AB 2729 (Patterson): This bill extends by 18 months the time frame for any housing entitlement for a housing development project that was issued and in effect on Jan. 1, 2024, and will expire prior to Dec. 31, 2025. “Housing development project” is defined as a residential or mixed-use project in which at least two-thirds of the square footage is for residential use, not including underground space. 

AB 2553 (Friedman): Requires cities and counties to set lower traffic impact mitigation fees for transit-oriented housing developments near major transit stops instead of just at transit stations and changes the definition of a major transit stop. CEQA defines “major transit stop” to include, among other locations, the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. This bill would revise the definition of “major transit stop” to increase the frequency of service intervals to 20 minutes.

AB 3012 (Grayson): Requires cities and counties to make available on their internet websites a fee estimate tool that the public can use to calculate an estimate of fees and exactions for a proposed housing development, and requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to create a fee schedule template and a list of best practices.

AB 3177 (Wendy Carrillo): The legislation prevents local agencies from imposing land dedication requirements on new housing developments in transit priority areas to widen a roadway for vehicular traffic purposes or for achieving a desired roadway width.

Local Governance

AB 598 (Wicks): This bill makes several changes to the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA). Specifically, the legislation provides that BAHFA’s regional expenditure may not make projects ineligible for funding based on the presence or absence of any city or county land use or housing policies.

AB 2488 (Ting): This bill allows the City and County of San Francisco to establish one downtown revitalization and economic recovery financing district.

SB 951 (Wiener): Current law, the California Coastal Act of 1976 (“Act”) prescribes procedures for the approval and certification of a local coastal program by the California Coastal Commission, and provides for the delegation of development review authority to a local government, as defined, with a certified local coastal program. Under the Act, an action taken by a local government after certification of its local coastal program on a coastal development permit application may be appealed to the Coastal Commission only on specified grounds and only for certain types of developments, including any development approved by a coastal county that is not designated as the principal permitted use under the zoning ordinance or zoning district map.

This bill exempts the City and County of San Francisco from the above provision relating to the appeal of developments approved by a coastal county.

AB 2117 (Patterson): This bill excludes the time when litigation over a permit approval is pending from counting toward the period of time before a permit or project approval issued by a city, county or state agency expires.

SB 1357 (Wahab): This bill requires the Housing Authority of the County of Alameda to (1) conduct a specified evaluation and review of its website to ensure information is easily accessible, and (2) develop a specified annual report related to the efficacy of its programs, data about the properties it manages and employment within the Housing Authority.

Parking

AB 2712 (Friedman): Prohibits the City of Los Angeles from granting preferential parking permits to residents of new developments exempt from minimum parking requirements under existing law.

AB 2898 (Carrillo): This bill updates the pilot program that requires property owners of “qualifying residential properties,” new multifamily properties in 10 specified counties, to unbundle the cost of parking from the cost of the rent, to exclude residential units leased to tenants utilizing specified federal housing vouchers.

Density Bonus

AB 2430 (Alvarez): The legislation prohibits a city, county, or city and county from charging a monitoring fee on a 100% affordable housing development using the state’s Density Bonus Law (DBL) to ensure the continued affordability required under the DBL and any applicable local inclusionary housing ordinance if the units in the development are subject to a regulatory monitoring agreement with certain state agencies.

AB 3116 (Garcia): The bill makes numerous modifications to the DBL as it applies to student housing projects. Specifically, it allows additional density bonuses for student housing development projects with between 21% and 24% of the units affordable to lower-income households, with up to a 50% density bonus. Projects with at least 23% affordable units are entitled to two concessions, incentives and no parking requirements for a bed space.

AB 2694 (Ward): This bill clarifies that residential care facilities for the elderly qualify as senior citizen housing developments under the DBL.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

AB 2597 (Ward): This bill revises the statutory housing element adoption deadline for jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) by providing an additional six months to Los Angeles and Imperial counties and jurisdictions within those counties. It also amends the timeline for local governments to appeal proposed RHNA plans.

SB 7 (Blakespear): This bill makes a number of technical changes to the regional housing needs determination (RHND) process conducted by HCD and the RHNA process conducted by HCD or the Councils of Governments.

AB 3093 (Ward): This legislation creates two new income categories, Acutely Low Income (ALI) and Extremely Low Income (ELI), in the RHND, RHNA and Housing Element Law.

Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)

SB 1037 (Wiener): This bill permits and empowers the SCAG or HCD to enforce the adoption of housing element revisions or to enforce any state law that requires a city, county or local agency to ministerially approve any planning or permit applications related to a housing development, and to assess a civil penalty of $10,000 – $50,000 per month per violation. Penalties may only be levied when the local agency’s acts or omissions are arbitrary, capricious or entirely lacking in evidentiary support, or are contrary to established public policy, unlawful or procedurally unfair.

AB 1886 (Alvarez): This bill states that a housing element or amendment is considered “substantially compliant” with the Housing Element Law when HCD or a court of competent jurisdiction determines the adopted housing element or amendment to be in substantial compliance with the Housing Element Law. HCD or a higher court may reverse such a finding. 

AB 1053 (Gabriel): This bill allows a borrower utilizing HCD’s multifamily loan funding programs to request funding from HCD as a construction loan, a traditional permanent financing option or a combination of both.

AB 2580 (Wicks): This bill would require a city and county’s Annual Progress Report to the Office of Planning and Research and HCD to include a list of all historic designations on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register of historic places by the city or county in the past year, and include the status of any housing development projects proposed for the new historic designations.

AB 1878 (Garcia): The bill creates the Tribal Housing Grant Program Fund Advisory Committee within HCD. It also limits HCD’s ability to require tribes to waive sovereign immunity to access funding. 

AB 2023 (Quirk-Silva and Alvarez): The legislation creates a rebuttable presumption of invalidity in any legal action challenging a local government’s action or failure to act if HCD finds that the action or failure to act does not substantially comply with the local government’s adopted housing element or housing element obligations.

AB 2240 (Arambula): Requires HCD, by Jan. 1, 2026, to engage and solicit feedback from specified stakeholders on the definition of “migratory agricultural worker” to update the definition. The bill also requires HCD to develop and, by July 1, 2027, submit to the Legislature a report that analyzes the feasibility and impact of transitioning housing units at Office of Migrant Services centers to year-round availability.

AB 2247 (Wallis): Existing law, the Mobile Home Parks Act (MPA), establishes requirements for the construction, maintenance, occupancy, use and design of mobile home parks. Existing law requires HCD to enforce the act unless a city, county, or city and county has assumed responsibility for enforcement. Existing law requires an enforcement agency to enter and inspect mobile home parks to ensure enforcement of the MPA. This legislation extends the sunset date of the MPA from Jan. 1, 2025, to Jan. 1, 2030.

AB 2667 (Santiago): This bill would require HCD to develop a standardized reporting format for programs and actions taken regarding the local agency affirmatively furthering fair housing that would enable the reporting of the assessment components described above. The bill would require local governments to utilize the standardized reporting format for the seventh and each subsequent revision of the housing element.

SB 1187 (McGuire): This bill enacts the Tribal Housing Reconstitution and Resiliency Act and creates a new tribal housing program, the Tribal Housing Grant Program, at HCD for the construction and rehabilitation of affordable rental and for-sale housing for Indian and essential families and individuals residing in an Indian area.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)

SB 1211 (Skinner): This bill increases the allowable detached ADUs on a lot with an existing multifamily dwelling from no more than two detached ADUs to no more than eight detached ADUs, provided that the number of ADUs does not exceed the number of existing dwelling units on the lot. It also prohibits local governments from requiring the replacement of uncovered parking spaces that are demolished to allow for construction of an ADU. 

AB 2533 (Carrillo): The bill extends the ADU amnesty law to unpermitted ADUs and JADUs built before 2020 (previously 2018) and provides a process for homeowners to permit their unpermitted ADUs; it also provides financial assistance to lower- and moderate-income households seeking to permit their unpermitted ADUs.

SB 1077 (Blakespear): This bill requires the California Coastal Commission, in coordination with HCD, to develop and provide guidance for local governments to facilitate the preparation of amendments to a local coastal program to clarify and simplify the permitting process for ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units in the coastal zone.

Affordable Housing and Homelessness

ACA 10 (Aguiar-Curry): This constitutional ballot measure, placed on the ballot by the California Legislature, would lower voter-approval requirements for local housing and infrastructure bonds from a two-thirds majority requirement to a 55% requirement. Voters will decide on this measure (Proposition 5) in the November 2024 election. 

SB 1361 (Blakespear): Exempts from CEQA any actions taken by local agencies related to contracting for services for people experiencing homelessness, including case management, resource navigation, security services, residential services and counseling services.

AB 535 (Schiavo): The bill prohibits a determination of whether a potential tenant is eligible for supportive, affordable or transitional housing under the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Act from considering a potential tenant’s service-connected disability benefits and modifies definitions of “secondary tenant” to conform to this exclusion.

AB 2353 (Ward): This bill provides that a property owner is not liable for interest or penalties and would prohibit property tax collection if the facilities are being constructed and the property owner has submitted to the county assessor a certain application for tax exemption. 

AB 799 (Luz Rivas): The bill requires the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to develop a strategic funding guide and a calendar of new or existing funding opportunities.

AB 2835 (Gabriel): Eliminates the sunset date on tenancy rules governing occupancy in interim homelessness programs operated out of privately owned hotels and motels.

AB 846 (Bonta): Requires the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), by June 30, 2025, to adopt regulations to establish a limit on annual rent increases for tenants in existing properties that were allowed a LIHTC, and requires TCAC to assess the rent increase limit annually.

AB 2005 (Ward): This bill would authorize the California State University (CSU) to establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of faculty or CSU employees who face challenges securing affordable housing. It permits CSU developers to receive local or state funds or tax credits designated for affordable rental housing and to restrict occupancy to faculty or CSU employees on land owned by CSU.

AB 2926 (Kalra): This bill changes the Preservation Notice Law (PNL) to (1) require an owner of an assisted housing development to accept a bona fide offer from a qualified entity to purchase and execute a purchase agreement or to record a new regulatory agreement with a term of at least 30 years that meets specified requirements; and (2) delete the option for an owner to decline to sell the property. “Assisted housing development” means a multifamily rental housing development of five or more units that receive governmental assistance.

AB 1782 (Ta): This bill would increase the amount that a housing successor agency to a redevelopment agency may expend per year on homeless prevention and rapid rehousing services to $500,000 plus any percentage change in the cost of living, as defined.

AB 2663 (Grayson): This bill, commencing on Jan. 1, 2026, would require a local agency that collects inclusionary housing in-lieu fees to post on its website the amount of those fees collected in the previous year and whether those fees are intended to be used for a project.

AB 2967 (Ting): Existing law, the Teacher Housing Act of 2016, authorizes a school district to establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of teachers and school district employees who face challenges securing affordable housing. This bill revises the definition of “teachers and school districts” in the Teacher Housing Act of 2016 to include a person employed by a nonprofit organization operating early childhood, prekindergarten or school-aged child care classrooms and programs on school district property with funding from the California Department of Education. 

AB 3035 (Pellerin): This bill expands the existing streamlined, ministerial approval process for farmworker housing established by AB 1783 (2019).

AB 2897 (Connolly): The bill expands the definition of a community land trust for property tax assessment purposes.

SB 1500 (Durazo): This bill prohibits the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and HCD from taking specified punitive actions against affordable housing developments in the City and County of Los Angeles that violate income limit requirements, if certain conditions are met.

SB 1465 (Archuleta): This bill allows any structure used for human habitation to be declared a substandard building regardless of the zoning or approved use of the building and makes other changes to code enforcement procedures.

SB 1395 (Becker): The bill provides additional exemptions from CEQA for specific actions regarding homeless shelters and changes several laws governing the creation of certain types of homeless shelters.

SB 393 (Glazer): In actions challenging certain low- or moderate-income housing projects, this bill would shift the burden of demonstrating that posting a bond would place an undue economic hardship on the plaintiff from the defendant to the plaintiff.

SB 1408 (Ward): This legislation prohibits mobile home park management from removing certain work vehicles owned by homeowners.

SB 1190 (Laird): This bill prohibits a mobile home park from prohibiting or restricting the installation and use of solar energy systems on mobile homes or their lots, with an exception for reasonable restrictions.

AB 2399 (Rendon): This bill requires a notice regarding the Mobile Home Residency Law Protection Program and how to contact the program to be included in a specified notice of a mobile home owner’s and mobile home park’s rights and responsibilities that the mobile home park must provide to all mobile home owners on an annual basis and as part of the rental agreement.

AB 2373 (Rendon): This bill limits the ability of mobile home park management to terminate a tenancy for nonpayment or for a change of park use unless the park has a valid permit to operate, issued by the enforcement agency.

AB 2387 (Pellerin): This bill creates a streamlined permitting process for a mobile home park owner to add lots to a park, not exceeding 10% of the previously approved number of lots in the park.

Fire and Building Standards

AB 2579 (Quirk-Silva): This bill provides a 12-month extension to the deadline for the obligation to begin performing inspections of exterior elevated elements that include load-bearing components in all buildings containing three or more multifamily dwelling units, thereby delaying the inspection deadline from Jan. 1, 2025, to Jan. 1, 2026.

Homeowners Association and Landlord-Tenant Law

AB 2159 (Maienschein): The bill authorizes a homeowners association (HOA) of a common interest development to adopt an election operating rule that allows the HOA to utilize an inspector of elections to conduct an election by electronic secret ballot unless the HOA’s governing documents provide otherwise, subject to certain conditions.

AB 2460 (Ta): This law adopts technical clarifications to the existing law governing delayed HOA board elections resulting from the initial absence of a quorum.

AB 2114 (Irwin): This bill adds licensed civil engineers to the types of inspectors eligible to perform visual inspections of exterior elevated elements for which a HOA has maintenance or repair responsibility.

SB 900 (Umberg): This bill makes several changes to the responsibility of HOAs relating to utility service repairs and replacements in common areas.

SB 552 (Newman): This bill revises the requirements for a home inspector when conducting a home inspection of a private single-family home with a pool or spa and updates which drowning-prevention features may be combined to meet specified safety requirements.

AB 2801 (Friedman): This legislation establishes that a landlord may claim against a security deposit only the reasonably necessary amounts. Further, claims against the tenant or the security deposit for work performed by a contractor, the landlord or the landlord’s employee must be limited to a reasonable amount necessary to restore the premises back to the condition it was in at the inception of the tenancy, exclusive of ordinary wear and tear.

AB 2747 (Haney): This bill requires certain landlords to offer each tenant obligated on a lease the option of having the tenant’s positive rental payment information reported to at least one nationwide consumer reporting agency.