SB 235 — Planning and zoning: housing production report: regional housing need allocation.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 844, Statutes of 2019.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 11, 2019. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 7 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Department of Housing and Community Development (department) that includes, among other specified information, the number of net new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy, thus far in the housing element cycle, as provided. This portion of the annual report is known as the production report. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the department, in consultation with each council of governments, to determine the existing and projected need for housing in each region and further requires the appropriate council of governments, or the department for cities and counties without a council of governments, to adopt a final regional housing need plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county, as provided. That law provides for the allocation of regional housing need by the council of government or the department, as applicable. That law also provides for the allocation of a portion of a county's share of the regional housing need to a city that is incorporated within its boundaries, or upon annexation of unincorporated land to an existing city within its boundaries, after the final allocation of regional housing need. This bill would authorize the County of Napa and the City of Napa to reach a mutually acceptable agreement to allow one of those jurisdictions to report on its annual production report to the department those completed entitlements, building permits, and certificates of occupancy issued by the other jurisdiction for the development of housing if certain conditions are met. The bill would require the Board of Supervisors of the County of Napa and the City Council of the City of Napa to each hold a public hearing to solicit public comment on the proposed agreement and to make specified written findings based on substantial evidence before approving the agreement. The bill would make conforming changes with respect to the production report required to be submitted to the department. The Planning and Zoning Law requires each city, county, or city and county to ensure that its housing element inventory or its housing element program makes sites available, as provided, sufficient to accommodate, at all times throughout the planning period, its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need. That law requires a city, county, or city and county to identify and make available within 180 days additional adequate sites to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need by income level, if the approval of a development project results in fewer units by income category than identified in the jurisdiction's housing element for that parcel and the jurisdiction does not find that the remaining sites in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need by income level. That law requires the department to notify the city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the office of the Attorney General, that the city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the local government has taken action in violation of these requirements. This bill would specify that its provisions regarding an agreement between the County of Napa and the City of Napa, as described above, do not waive or reduce the requirement to ensure that a jurisdiction's housing element inventory accommodate sufficient sites to meet the jurisdiction's unmet share of regional housing need. If the site of a proposed housing development that is subject to the agreement is no longer adequate to meet specified requirements under existing law and to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, the bill would require the relevant jurisdiction to comply with the requirement to identify and make available adequate sites, as described above. The bill would provide that failure to comply with this requirement constitutes a violation of state law and require the department to notify the office of the Attorney General of that violation. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law requires the council of governments or the department, whichever assigned the share of regional housing need of a county, to reduce the county's share if specified conditions are met, including that one or more cities within the county agree to increase its share or their shares in an amount equivalent to the reduction. This bill would expand this requirement to apply in the case of a regional housing need allocation by a subregional entity. By adding to the duties of a subregional entity with respect to the allocation of regional housing need, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards. Existing law requires the objective planning standards to include, among other things, that the development be located in a locality for which the department determines that the number of units that have been issued building permits is less than the locality's share of the regional housing needs, by income category, for the applicable reporting period. This bill would require that this determination be based on the number of net new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy reported in the annual production report, as described above. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65913.4 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1485 and SB 592 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 1485 and SB 592 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Napa and the City of Napa. (6) 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/12/19 - Chaptered Current pdf October 12, 2019
- Enrolled 09/17/19 - Enrolled pdf September 17, 2019
- Amended 09/09/19 - Amended Assembly pdf September 09, 2019
- Amended 09/03/19 - Amended Assembly pdf September 03, 2019
- Amended 03/25/19 - Amended Senate pdf March 25, 2019
- Introduced 02/11/19 - Introduced pdf February 11, 2019
- SB235 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 844, Statutes of 2019.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 10 a.m.
-
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2940.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
-
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3536.) Ordered to the Senate.
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended.
-
Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (August 14).
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 3). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Coauthors revised.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (June 19). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and L. GOV.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 819.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
-
Set for hearing April 22.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0. Page 551.) (April 2). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HOUSING.
-
Set for hearing April 2.
-
Referred to Com. on HOUSING.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 14.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Dodd · Primary
- Cecilia M. Aguiar-Curry · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Dodd
Co-sponsors (1)
- Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 79 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Diep | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Cunningham | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Voepel | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Kamlager-Dove | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Yea |
| Gloria | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Kiley | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | 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 |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Gonzalez, Lena A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (18)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Diep | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Petrie-Norris, Cottie | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Voepel | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Not Voting |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Yea |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Gloria | — | Yea |
| Kiley | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Diep | — | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 26 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 36 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (38)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Not Voting |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 0% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Not Voting |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 235 do?
- (1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. That law requires the planning agency of a city or county to provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to, among other entities, the Department of Housing and Community Development (department) that includes, among other specified information, the number of net new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy, thus far in the housing element cycle, as provided. This portion of the annual report is known as the production report. The Planning and Zoning Law requires the department, in consultation with each council of governments, to determine the existing and projected need for housing in each region and further requires the appropriate council of governments, or the department for cities and counties without a council of governments, to adopt a final regional housing need plan that allocates a share of the regional housing need to each city, county, or city and county, as provided. That law provides for the allocation of regional housing need by the council of government or the department, as applicable. That law also provides for the allocation of a portion of a county's share of the regional housing need to a city that is incorporated within its boundaries, or upon annexation of unincorporated land to an existing city within its boundaries, after the final allocation of regional housing need. This bill would authorize the County of Napa and the City of Napa to reach a mutually acceptable agreement to allow one of those jurisdictions to report on its annual production report to the department those completed entitlements, building permits, and certificates of occupancy issued by the other jurisdiction for the development of housing if certain conditions are met. The bill would require the Board of Supervisors of the County of Napa and the City Council of the City of Napa to each hold a public hearing to solicit public comment on the proposed agreement and to make specified written findings based on substantial evidence before approving the agreement. The bill would make conforming changes with respect to the production report required to be submitted to the department. The Planning and Zoning Law requires each city, county, or city and county to ensure that its housing element inventory or its housing element program makes sites available, as provided, sufficient to accommodate, at all times throughout the planning period, its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need. That law requires a city, county, or city and county to identify and make available within 180 days additional adequate sites to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need by income level, if the approval of a development project results in fewer units by income category than identified in the jurisdiction's housing element for that parcel and the jurisdiction does not find that the remaining sites in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need by income level. That law requires the department to notify the city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the office of the Attorney General, that the city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the local government has taken action in violation of these requirements. This bill would specify that its provisions regarding an agreement between the County of Napa and the City of Napa, as described above, do not waive or reduce the requirement to ensure that a jurisdiction's housing element inventory accommodate sufficient sites to meet the jurisdiction's unmet share of regional housing need. If the site of a proposed housing development that is subject to the agreement is no longer adequate to meet specified requirements under existing law and to accommodate the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, the bill would require the relevant jurisdiction to comply with the requirement to identify and make available adequate sites, as described above. The bill would provide that failure to comply with this requirement constitutes a violation of state law and require the department to notify the office of the Attorney General of that violation. (2) The Planning and Zoning Law requires the council of governments or the department, whichever assigned the share of regional housing need of a county, to reduce the county's share if specified conditions are met, including that one or more cities within the county agree to increase its share or their shares in an amount equivalent to the reduction. This bill would expand this requirement to apply in the case of a regional housing need allocation by a subregional entity. By adding to the duties of a subregional entity with respect to the allocation of regional housing need, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards. Existing law requires the objective planning standards to include, among other things, that the development be located in a locality for which the department determines that the number of units that have been issued building permits is less than the locality's share of the regional housing needs, by income category, for the applicable reporting period. This bill would require that this determination be based on the number of net new units of housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy reported in the annual production report, as described above. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65913.4 of the Government Code proposed by AB 1485 and SB 592 to be operative only if this bill and either or both AB 1485 and SB 592 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Napa and the City of Napa. (6) 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
- Who sponsors SB 235?
- SB 235 is sponsored by Dodd and Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. (Democratic).
- What is the current status of SB 235?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 11, 2019. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 235?
- Track SB 235 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 235
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.
Stay ahead of SB 235
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →