California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly 1 D cosponsors

AB 1484 — Mitigation Fee Act: housing developments.

Last action — Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b).

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

The Mitigation Fee Act requires a local agency that establishes, increases, or imposes a fee as a condition of approval of a development project to, among other things, determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. Existing law, the Quimby Act, which is within the Subdivision Map Act, authorizes the legislative body of a city or county to require the dedication of land or to impose fees for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative map or parcel subdivision map if specified requirements are met. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, after a community facilities district has been created and authorized to levy specified special taxes, authorizes the legislative body, by ordinance, to levy the special taxes at the rate and apportion them in the manner specified in the resolution forming the community facilities district. This bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing a housing impact requirement adopted by the local agency on a housing development project, as defined, unless specified requirements are satisfied by the local agency, including that the housing impact requirement be roughly proportional in both nature and extent to the impact created by the housing development project. The bill, for purposes of these provisions, defines "housing impact requirement" as a fee imposed under the Mitigation Fee Act, dedications of parkland or in-lieu fees imposed under the Quimby Act, a construction excise tax, or landowner-approved taxes imposed under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. This bill would prohibit a housing impact requirement from curing deficiencies in a public facility serving existing development, unless the amount of the housing impact requirement is roughly proportional both in nature and extent to the housing development project's impact on the public facility. The bill would prohibit a housing impact requirement from being based on providing a level of service, as defined, that exceeds the existing community's current level of service. This bill would require a local agency to adopt a nexus study that is used to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of these provisions, subject to specified public participation requirements. The bill would require a local agency to make an individualized determination that a housing development project will have the same type and amount of impact projected for a type of development analyzed in the nexus study. Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including zoning variances, use permits, building inspections, and the processing of maps, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, 23 of the electors. Existing law provides that these fees may be challenged within 120 days of the effective date of the ordinance or resolution establishing the fee. This bill would additionally provide that those fees are subject to specified protest procedures upon the payment of the fees. This bill would make findings that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, applies to all cities, including a charter city and a charter city and county. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b).

  2. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  3. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  4. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  5. From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  6. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  7. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  8. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (July 10).

  9. Referred to Com. on GOV. & F.

  10. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  11. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 1772.)

  12. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  13. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (May 8).

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  16. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.

  17. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  18. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  19. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.

  20. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 3). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  21. Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.

  22. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. Read second time and amended.

  23. Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and L. GOV.

  24. Read first time.

  25. From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.

  26. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 1484 Grayson Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 74 Yea · 0 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 43005
Democratic 24001
Republican 7000
Total 74006
% of votes cast 93%0%0%8%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Brough — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Salas — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Levine — Yea
Melendez — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Low — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Wood — Yea
Medina — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Chu — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Weber — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Burke — Not Voting
Friedman — Not Voting
Cooley — Not Voting
Ting — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Not Voting
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass. To Consent Calendar.

Passed 18 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Unaffiliated 11000
Total 18000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 2000
Democratic 5000
Republican 1000
Total 8000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

housing
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 1484 do?
The Mitigation Fee Act requires a local agency that establishes, increases, or imposes a fee as a condition of approval of a development project to, among other things, determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. Existing law, the Quimby Act, which is within the Subdivision Map Act, authorizes the legislative body of a city or county to require the dedication of land or to impose fees for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative map or parcel subdivision map if specified requirements are met. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, after a community facilities district has been created and authorized to levy specified special taxes, authorizes the legislative body, by ordinance, to levy the special taxes at the rate and apportion them in the manner specified in the resolution forming the community facilities district. This bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing a housing impact requirement adopted by the local agency on a housing development project, as defined, unless specified requirements are satisfied by the local agency, including that the housing impact requirement be roughly proportional in both nature and extent to the impact created by the housing development project. The bill, for purposes of these provisions, defines "housing impact requirement" as a fee imposed under the Mitigation Fee Act, dedications of parkland or in-lieu fees imposed under the Quimby Act, a construction excise tax, or landowner-approved taxes imposed under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. This bill would prohibit a housing impact requirement from curing deficiencies in a public facility serving existing development, unless the amount of the housing impact requirement is roughly proportional both in nature and extent to the housing development project's impact on the public facility. The bill would prohibit a housing impact requirement from being based on providing a level of service, as defined, that exceeds the existing community's current level of service. This bill would require a local agency to adopt a nexus study that is used to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of these provisions, subject to specified public participation requirements. The bill would require a local agency to make an individualized determination that a housing development project will have the same type and amount of impact projected for a type of development analyzed in the nexus study. Existing law requires fees charged by a local agency for specified purposes, including zoning variances, use permits, building inspections, and the processing of maps, to not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of this cost is submitted to, and approved by, 23 of the electors. Existing law provides that these fees may be challenged within 120 days of the effective date of the ordinance or resolution establishing the fee. This bill would additionally provide that those fees are subject to specified protest procedures upon the payment of the fees. This bill would make findings that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, applies to all cities, including a charter city and a charter city and county. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 1484?
AB 1484 is sponsored by Grayson, Timothy S. (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 1484?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 1484?
Track AB 1484 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1484

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 1484

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →