California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 2501 — Housing: density bonuses.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 758, Statutes of 2016.

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

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 19, 2016. Enacted.

Odds of enactment

High chance

Based 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

Likely to advance 74% · moderate confidence

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 3 sponsors

    1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.

  • 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

Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of the local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low income, low-income, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. Existing law authorizes the waiver or reduction of development standards that would preclude this development. Existing law requires continued affordability for 55 years or longer, as specified, of all very low income and low-income units that qualified an applicant for a density bonus. Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to adopt an ordinance to implement these requirements and to establish procedures to carry them out. This bill would revise and recast these provisions to require the local government to adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application, provide a list of documents and information required to be submitted with the application in order for it to be deemed complete, and notify the applicant whether it is complete. By increasing the duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit a local government from requiring additional reports or studies to be prepared as a condition of an application. The bill would additionally require each component of any density calculation that results in fractional units to be rounded up to the next whole number, and would provide that this provision is declaratory of existing law. Existing law defines the term "density bonus" for these purposes to mean a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density as of the date of the application and provides that the applicant may elect to accept a lesser percentage of density bonus. This bill would specify that the term "density bonus" means a density increase over the maximum allowable gross residential density at the time of the date of the application, or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase or no increase in density. Existing law requires a local government to grant a proposal for specific incentives or concessions requested by an applicant unless the local government makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, that, among other things, the concession or incentive is not required in order to provide affordable housing costs or for rents for the targeted units, as specified. This bill would, instead, provide that the local government is required to provide the requested concessions or incentives unless it finds, based on substantial evidence, that the concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs or rents for the targeted units, as specified. Existing law defines the term "housing development" for these purposes to mean a development project for 5 or more residential units. This bill would expand that definition to include mixed-use housing. 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. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code, proposed by AB 2442 and AB 2556, that would become operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 758, Statutes of 2016.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 11:30 a.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 74. Noes 4. Page 6540.).

  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 34. Noes 3. Page 5417.).

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

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

  12. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (June 28).

  13. In committee: Set, first hearing. Testimony taken. Further hearing to be set.

  14. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on T. & H.

  15. Referred to Com. on T. & H.

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

  17. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 50. Noes 11. Page 4952.)

  18. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  19. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 2.) (May 11).

  20. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 20). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

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

  23. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (April 13). Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  24. (pending re-refer to Com. on L. GOV.)

  25. Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 4218.)

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

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

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

  29. Read first time.

  30. From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.

  31. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

  • Bloom · Primary
  • Daly · Cosponsor
  • Low · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on · 3 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Bloom

Co-sponsors (2)

  • Daly
  • Low

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"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 2501 BLOOM Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 74 Yea · 4 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 64402
Democratic 5000
Republican 5000
Total 74402
% of votes cast 93%5%0%3%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Not Voting
Holden — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Low — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Ting — Nay
Waldron — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Williams — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Daly — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Burke — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Salas — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Mayes — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Gray — Not Voting
Hadley — Yea
Chang — Yea
Harper — Nay
Chu — Yea
Kim — Yea
Levine — Nay
Linder — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Rodriguez — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading AB2501 Bloom By Allen

Passed 34 Yea · 3 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 32301
Democratic 2001
Total 34302
% of votes cast 87%8%0%5%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Lara — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Allen — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Bates — Nay
Block — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leno — Nay
Leyva — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Moorlach — Nay
Pavley — Not Voting
Hall — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Not Voting
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

AB 2501 BLOOM Assembly Third Reading

Passed 50 Yea · 11 Nay · 19 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 459016
Republican 1103
Democratic 4100
Total 5011019
% of votes cast 63%14%0%24%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Nay
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Not Voting
Rodriguez — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Weber — Yea
Williams — Not Voting
Eggman — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Chang — Not Voting
Harper — Nay
Kim — Nay
Chiu — Not Voting
Chu — Not Voting
Dodd — Not Voting
Levine — Nay
Mayes — Not Voting
Melendez — Not Voting
Mullin — Not Voting
Obernolte — Nay
Achadjian — Nay
Bigelow — Not Voting
Brough — Not Voting
Brown — Not Voting
Quirk — Yea
Ting — Not Voting
Wagner — Nay
Olsen — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Burke — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Salas — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Holden — Yea
Linder — Yea
Low — Yea
Gray — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Medina — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Wood — Yea
Hadley — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Nay
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Not Voting
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Not Voting
Travis Allen — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 14 Yea · 2 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 12103
Democratic 2000
Republican 0101
Total 14204
% of votes cast 70%10%0%20%
How each member voted (20)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Not Voting
Bloom — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Holden — Yea
Chang — Not Voting
Chau — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Not Voting
Wood — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

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 2501 do?
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of the local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low income, low-income, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. Existing law authorizes the waiver or reduction of development standards that would preclude this development. Existing law requires continued affordability for 55 years or longer, as specified, of all very low income and low-income units that qualified an applicant for a density bonus. Existing law requires a city, county, or city and county to adopt an ordinance to implement these requirements and to establish procedures to carry them out. This bill would revise and recast these provisions to require the local government to adopt procedures and timelines for processing a density bonus application, provide a list of documents and information required to be submitted with the application in order for it to be deemed complete, and notify the applicant whether it is complete. By increasing the duties of local officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit a local government from requiring additional reports or studies to be prepared as a condition of an application. The bill would additionally require each component of any density calculation that results in fractional units to be rounded up to the next whole number, and would provide that this provision is declaratory of existing law. Existing law defines the term "density bonus" for these purposes to mean a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density as of the date of the application and provides that the applicant may elect to accept a lesser percentage of density bonus. This bill would specify that the term "density bonus" means a density increase over the maximum allowable gross residential density at the time of the date of the application, or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase or no increase in density. Existing law requires a local government to grant a proposal for specific incentives or concessions requested by an applicant unless the local government makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, that, among other things, the concession or incentive is not required in order to provide affordable housing costs or for rents for the targeted units, as specified. This bill would, instead, provide that the local government is required to provide the requested concessions or incentives unless it finds, based on substantial evidence, that the concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs or rents for the targeted units, as specified. Existing law defines the term "housing development" for these purposes to mean a development project for 5 or more residential units. This bill would expand that definition to include mixed-use housing. 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. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65915 of the Government Code, proposed by AB 2442 and AB 2556, that would become operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2017, and this bill is chaptered last.
Who sponsors AB 2501?
AB 2501 is sponsored by Bloom, Daly, and Low.
What is the current status of AB 2501?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 19, 2016. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 2501?
Track AB 2501 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2501

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 2501

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →