AB 2668 — Planning and zoning.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 658, Statutes of 2022.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 18, 2022. Enacted.
Odds of enactment
High chanceBased on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.
Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.
A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.
Prognosis
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 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.
Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.
Summary
(1) 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 specifies that a development is consistent with the objective planning standards if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the development is consistent with the objective planning standards. This bill would clarify that a development subject to these provisions is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, and not subject to a conditional use permit or any other nonlegislative discretionary approval. The bill would specify that a local government is required to approve a development if it determines that the development is consistent with objective planning standards, as specified. Existing law requires a development that is subject to these provisions to dedicate a minimum percentage of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making either 80% below or 120% below the area median income, as specified. This bill would clarify that the minimum percentage of total units that a development must dedicate is to be calculated before calculating any density bonus. Existing law prohibits a development subject to these provisions from being located on a hazardous waste site unless the State Department of Public Health, State Water Resources Control Board, or Department of Toxic Substances Control has otherwise cleared the site for residential use or residential mixed uses. This bill would additionally authorize a development subject to these provisions to be located on a hazardous waste site if a local agency has otherwise determined that the site is suitable for residential use or residential mixed uses or the site is an underground storage tank site and has received a uniform closure letter based on criteria established by the State Water Resources Control Board, as specified. Existing law authorizes a development proponent to request a modification to a development that has been approved under the streamlined, ministerial approval process if the request is submitted before the issuance of the final building permit required for construction of the development. This bill would prohibit a local government from determining that a development, including an application for a modification, is in conflict with the objective planning standards on the basis that application materials are not included, if the application contains substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the development is consistent with the objective planning standards. Existing law authorizes a local government to impose design review and public oversight of a development subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process, provided that the design review or public oversight is objective and any reasonable objective design standards imposed on the development are adopted before the submission of the development application and broadly applicable to development within the jurisdiction. This bill would require a local government that determines that a project is in conflict with those objective design review or public oversight standards to provide the development proponent written documentation of which objective standard or standards the development conflicts with, as specified. The bill would make other clarifying changes. (2) 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 requires a city, county, or special district that conducts an impact fee nexus study to follow specified standards and practices. This bill would define "city" for this purpose to include a charter city. (3) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65913.4 of the Government Code proposed by SB 6 to be operative only if this bill and SB 6 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 09/28/22 - Chaptered Current pdf September 28, 2022
- Enrolled 09/02/22 - Enrolled pdf September 02, 2022
- Amended 08/25/22 - Amended Senate pdf August 25, 2022
- Amended 08/18/22 - Amended Senate pdf August 18, 2022
- Amended 08/10/22 - Amended Senate pdf August 10, 2022
- Amended 06/22/22 - Amended Senate pdf June 22, 2022
- Amended 06/06/22 - Amended Senate pdf June 06, 2022
- Amended 03/31/22 - Amended Assembly pdf March 31, 2022
- Introduced 02/18/22 - Introduced pdf February 18, 2022
- AB2668 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 658, Statutes of 2022.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
-
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 74. Noes 0.).
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 5368.).
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 29).
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on GOV. & F. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 13). Re-referred to Com. on GOV. & F.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on HOUSING.
-
Referred to Coms. on HOUSING and GOV. & F.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 68. Noes 0. Page 4699.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (May 4).
-
Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 23). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
-
Referred to Coms. on H. & C.D. and L. GOV.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 21.
-
Introduced. To print.
Sponsors
- Timothy S. Grayson · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic
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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 29 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Republican | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 74 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Voepel | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Villapudua | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Kiley | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Cunningham | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Not Voting |
| Maienschein | — | Not Voting |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Not Voting |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Vince Fong | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Alvarez, David | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Bennett, Steve | Democratic | Yea |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Haney, Matt | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Lee, Alex | Democratic | Yea |
| McKinnor, Tina | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | 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 |
| Ward, Christopher M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Wilson, Lori D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Davies, Laurie | Republican | Yea |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Valladares, Suzette Martinez | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Min | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Newman | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Becker, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Cortese, Dave | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | 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 |
| Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (5)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Cortese, Dave | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 25 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Unaffiliated | 34 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Republican | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 68 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| % of votes cast | 87% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (78)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Smith | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Not Voting |
| Cunningham | — | Not Voting |
| Nazarian | — | Not Voting |
| Ting | — | Not Voting |
| Low | — | Not Voting |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Voepel | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Villapudua | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Kiley | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Vince Fong | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca | Democratic | Yea |
| Bennett, Steve | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Berman, Marc | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Bryan, Isaac G. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Cervantes, Sabrina | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grayson, Timothy S. | Democratic | Yea |
| Haney, Matt | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Lee, Alex | Democratic | Yea |
| Muratsuchi, Al | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Yea |
| Petrie-Norris, Cottie | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Reyes, Eloise Gómez | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Rubio, Blanca E. | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Ward, Christopher M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Wilson, Lori D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Chen, Phillip | Republican | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Davies, Laurie | Republican | Yea |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
| Valladares, Suzette Martinez | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Voepel | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Boerner, Tasha | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Ramos, James C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Rivas, Robert | Democratic | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Kiley | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Gabriel, Jesse | Democratic | Yea |
| Kalra, Ash | Democratic | Yea |
| Quirk-Silva, Sharon | Democratic | Yea |
| Ward, Christopher M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wicks, Buffy | Democratic | Yea |
| Seyarto, Kelly | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 2668 do?
- (1) 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 specifies that a development is consistent with the objective planning standards if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the development is consistent with the objective planning standards. This bill would clarify that a development subject to these provisions is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, and not subject to a conditional use permit or any other nonlegislative discretionary approval. The bill would specify that a local government is required to approve a development if it determines that the development is consistent with objective planning standards, as specified. Existing law requires a development that is subject to these provisions to dedicate a minimum percentage of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making either 80% below or 120% below the area median income, as specified. This bill would clarify that the minimum percentage of total units that a development must dedicate is to be calculated before calculating any density bonus. Existing law prohibits a development subject to these provisions from being located on a hazardous waste site unless the State Department of Public Health, State Water Resources Control Board, or Department of Toxic Substances Control has otherwise cleared the site for residential use or residential mixed uses. This bill would additionally authorize a development subject to these provisions to be located on a hazardous waste site if a local agency has otherwise determined that the site is suitable for residential use or residential mixed uses or the site is an underground storage tank site and has received a uniform closure letter based on criteria established by the State Water Resources Control Board, as specified. Existing law authorizes a development proponent to request a modification to a development that has been approved under the streamlined, ministerial approval process if the request is submitted before the issuance of the final building permit required for construction of the development. This bill would prohibit a local government from determining that a development, including an application for a modification, is in conflict with the objective planning standards on the basis that application materials are not included, if the application contains substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the development is consistent with the objective planning standards. Existing law authorizes a local government to impose design review and public oversight of a development subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process, provided that the design review or public oversight is objective and any reasonable objective design standards imposed on the development are adopted before the submission of the development application and broadly applicable to development within the jurisdiction. This bill would require a local government that determines that a project is in conflict with those objective design review or public oversight standards to provide the development proponent written documentation of which objective standard or standards the development conflicts with, as specified. The bill would make other clarifying changes. (2) 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 requires a city, county, or special district that conducts an impact fee nexus study to follow specified standards and practices. This bill would define "city" for this purpose to include a charter city. (3) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65913.4 of the Government Code proposed by SB 6 to be operative only if this bill and SB 6 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
- Who sponsors AB 2668?
- AB 2668 is sponsored by Grayson, Timothy S. (Democratic).
- What is the current status of AB 2668?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 18, 2022. Enacted.
- Where can I track AB 2668?
- Track AB 2668 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 2668
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 AB 2668
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →