State Bills in Brief: May 8-15

May 8, 2024

A weekly primer on the bills and committee hearings that have a direct impact on cities

By Brian Hendershot, Cal Cities Advocate managing editor. Additional contributions by the Cal Cities Advocacy Team

The biggest legislative topic this week might not be what’s happening in the Legislature. Instead, all eyes are focused on what’s happening inside the court. The California Supreme Court today heard oral arguments — read our recap here — in a case that could remove a proposition from the November ballot for the first time since 1948.

Also new and notable: Gov. Gavin Newsom announced on Tuesday that he is sponsoring AB 3093 (Ward). The long-rumored bill would require cities to consider and plan for the needs of homeless residents when developing their housing elements.

The move comes nearly a month after Sen. Steven Glazer requested an audit of the Department of Housing and Community Development’s housing element review process, noting widespread concerns about its “timeliness, consistency, and fair application.”

Cal Cities has not yet issued a formal position on AB 3093 and is closely engaged in Sen. Glazer’s audit request.

Looking for ways to get engaged? Cal Cities lobbyists regularly upload sample letters for major bills — just click the link for a particular bill. Instructions for sample letters are at the top of each letter, but committee hearings move fast. If you’re not sure when the best time to send a letter is, contact your regional public affairs manager.

For information about bills scheduled for a committee hearing through May 15, keep reading. To learn what each section means — or to access a previous State Bills in Brief — visit the archive page.

Hot bills

Lawmakers are trying to recreate last year’s hot labor summer. Also, up for debate this week —housing, funding, climate change, and natural disasters.

A $50,000 monthly fine for cities

What now?! SB 1037 (Wiener) would allow the state attorney general to ask a court to fine a city that fails to adopt a compliant housing element or violates state laws that require ministerial approval of certain housing projects. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
Can’t the attorney general take legal action already? Unlike existing laws, SB 1037 does not give cities time to correct their actions before penalizing cities. Even cities acting in good faith would need to pay the attorney general for all investigating and prosecuting costs.
When is the hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

No more self-certification for housing elements

Changing housing element law. AB 1886 (Alvarez) would remove the ability of cities to self-certify housing plans that are “in substantial compliance with housing element law.” This would encourage more developers to bypass local zoning laws in favor of the so-called builder’s remedy. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
Not helpful. Housing elements take years to develop. Cities often receive unclear or conflicting guidance about their plans. Instead of punishing good faith efforts, the state should help cities finalize their housing elements and put those plans to work.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Strike bill jeopardizes city services

Undermining MOUs and services. AB 2404 (Lee) would make sympathy striking and honoring the picket line a human right. It would also allow nearly any employee to strike regardless of their job duties and employer agreements. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
This sounds familiar. As it should. Gov. Gavin Newsom rejected a similar measure last year, citing that its potential to seriously disrupt or even halt the delivery of critical public services, particularly in places where public services are co-located.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Inflexible contract requirements

A de facto prohibition. AB 2557 (Ortega) would dramatically curb local agency service contracts due to its onerous obligations and costs. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
Nearly 5,000 impacted agencies. AB 2557 would require cities and contractors to adopt sweeping new notification, reporting, and auditing measures. If passed, it would directly undercut statewide policy goals and partnerships, including the Homeless Housing and Prevention program.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Unlocking federal funding

Focused funding. AB 2776 (Rodriguez) would prioritize infrastructure and housing projects for communities impacted by major federal disasters. Cal Cities supports the measure.
Why it matters. State and federal disaster funding criteria are specific. Local governments can bear the brunt of recovery costs if disaster criteria aren’t met. California has had nearly 30 major federal disasters since 2018.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Better recovery housing oversight

Greater accountability. SB 913 (Umberg) would allow cities to collaborate with the state to investigate and enforce existing recovery home licensing laws. Cal Cities is sponsoring the measure.
More transparency. AB 2081 (Davies) would require the operator of a licensed recovery home to disclose to those seeking care that they can check the Department of Health Care Services website to confirm a facility’s compliance with state licensing laws. Cal Cities is co-sponsoring the measure.
When are the hearings? Lawmakers will hear SB 913 on May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee. AB 2081 was heard on May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

A voluntary, streamlined path for wildfire preparedness

A Cal Cities-sponsored measure. AB 2330 (Holden) would streamline the process for vegetation removal and fuel management in Fire Hazard Severity Zones near urban communities while upholding environmental laws in a reasonable timeline.
Catastrophic wildfires. The size and severity of wildfires in California have increased, with seven of the 20 largest wildfires and the top two most destructive wildfires occurring over the past seven years. However, long timelines are delaying local efforts in areas most at risk of catastrophic wildfires.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Cal Cities-sponsored measure would help reduce methane emissions

No wasted efforts. SB 972 (Min) would require CalRecycle to strengthen its assistance efforts to help cities actively working to reduce organic waste in landfills and methane emissions. The agency would also need to report back to the Legislature on the organic waste diversion progress and how to better align the law with the state’s other climate goals.
Room for improvement. A 2023 report found that the amount of organic waste in landfills increased by a million tons between 2014 and 2020, a trend at odds with the goal of reducing methane emissions. Greater local assistance and accountability are key to progress – which SB 972 would provide.
When is the hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Expanding the definition of an emergency

What does the bill do? SB 1461 (Allen) would add landslide to the state definition of state of emergency or local emergency. Cal Cities supports the measure.
Why is this important? Declaring an emergency can unlock greater resources and funding. With climate extremes sweeping the state, this is a proactive way to ensure those resources are readily available.
What is the next hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Priority bills

Major public safety and housing bills must clear an appropriations deadline this week.

Costly conservation connectivity

Another planning mandate. AB 1889 (Friedman) would require cities to include a wildlife connectivity element in their conservation element. Cal Cities opposes the measure unless it is amended.
It could be better. As drafted, the bill would create an unworkable timeline for cities. A pending measure in the Assembly would require the state to conduct wildlife mapping. It would make sense to gather this information before requiring cities to amend their conservation element.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Cal Cities-supported retail theft measures

Shoplifting distractions. SB 1242 (Min) would create higher penalties for people who commit arson to attempt retail theft, an increasingly common tactic.
Resale. SB 1416 (Newman) would create bigger penalties for professional organized retail theft, particularly large-scale resale.
When are the hearings? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Updating insurance underwriting models

A fair solution. SB 1060 (Becker) would require insurers to consider wildfire risk mitigation efforts when setting insurance costs for homeowners. Cal Cities supports the measures.
An insurance crisis. Public agencies and private individuals have ramped up wildfire mitigation efforts. Not accounting for these activities has caused some home insurers to pull out of the state or curtail their operations.
When is the hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Changes to newly minted housing laws

Nibbling away at local control. AB 2243 (Wicks) would expand a recent law that requires cities to automatically approve some housing projects in areas zoned for office, retail, or parking. Cal Cities opposes the measure.
Implementation time would be nice. Cities are still working to update their housing plans based on the dozens of new laws recently passed. Lawmakers should ensure cities have the tools and resources needed to follow this new law first before forcing them back to the drawing board.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

State-led and -owned development

A good idea on paper. AB 2881 (Lee) would create a new state agency tasked with producing and acquiring social housing. Cal Cities opposes the measure unless it is amended.
With some caveats. Cal Cities supports the intent of the measure. However, it undermines — and calls into question — the costly and lengthy housing plans cities must produce. The agency would not have to follow local zoning rules.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

A slowing economy doesn’t have to mean slowing construction

A new financing program. AB 2665 (Lee) would create a zero-interest loan program for some affordable housing projects. Cal Cities supports the measure.
Why? There simply isn’t enough money for affordable housing. Grant programs like the Multifamily Housing Program are extremely oversubscribed. Many projects are permitted and shovel-ready. They just need funding.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Flexible office conversions

The carrot, not the stick. AB 2910 (Santiago) would make it easier for cities to repurpose underused commercial and industrial spaces into residential housing. Cal Cities supports the measure.
It’s a cliche, but true. COVID-19 fundamentally changed how we work, leading to increased demand for remote and hybrid work in many cities. This measure would reduce housing shortages, commercial real estate woes, and urban sprawl.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Hire your own inspector

Not the way to cut red tape. AB 2433 (Quirk-Silva) would allow applicants to pay for a third-party inspection during a construction project. Directly paying a “regulator” (a private individual in this case) creates biased results. Cal Cities opposes the measure unless it is amended.
An alternative approach. Cities must ensure projects comply with regularly changing laws and ordinances. A far better approach would be to focus on expediting the permitting process, like those already in place for broadband microtrenches.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Operate it or ticket

A safe, sensible solution. AB 2286 (Aguiar-Curry) would require a human safety operator for the use of medium- and heavy-duty autonomous vehicles on public roads for testing purposes. Cal Cities supports the measure.
We still have the edge on robots. Self-driving cars cannot predict and recognize risk quickly. They are simply not as quick as a human brain. There are safety concerns about heavy autonomous vehicles, especially those weighing many times that of the average passenger car.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Zoning for more compost

Permitting and citing. SB 1045 (Blakespear) would require the Office of Planning and Research and CalRecycle to detail the best practices for siting composting facilities on its website. Cal Cities supports the measure.
50-100. That’s the estimated number of new organic waste recycling facilities needed to meet the state’s methane emission reduction goals. Cities need technical assistance to meet this ambitious goal.
When is the hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Drought planning

What would the bill do? SB 1330 (Archuleta) would clarify several key provisions in the long-term water use standards under a new water conservation law. This includes simplifying the processes to submit information, clarifying reporting dates, and extending deadlines since the regulations are two years behind the statutory deadline.
Why is this important? Water use will be regulated through new long-term water use standards. Water usage will need to go down over time for residential indoor and outdoor uses and commercial outdoor uses where there are meters in urban areas. The goal is to prevent mandatory water cuts during the next drought.
When is the hearing? May 13 at 10 a.m. in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

With age comes unique insights

Older adults. AB 2207 (Reyes) would require six different California state boards, commissions, and advisory committees to include an older adult representative. Cal Cities supports the measure.
Silver tsunami. By 2030, one in four Californians will be 60 or older. Older Californians should have an avenue to share their unique insights on the issues impacting them the most, like homelessness.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Other bills to watch

Cal Cities has not yet issued formal position letters for these bills.

Office conversions

Vacant buildings. AB 3068 (Haney) would create a streamlined approval process for office conversion projects that meet certain affordability criteria.
What is Cal Cities’ position? Cal Cities opposes the measure unless it is amended. A formal letter is pending.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Community clinics

Approvals. 2085 (Bauer-Kahan) seeks to increase access to healthcare by requiring cities to allow the construction of community clinics in areas zoned for office, retail, health care, or parking.
What is Cal Cities’ position? Cal Cities will support the measure if it is amended to include distancing requirements, increased approval time, and the definition of community clinics. A formal letter is pending.
When was the hearing? May 8 at 9:30 a.m. in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

View all tracked bill hearings.