California 2021-2022 Regular Session Status: Enacted 4 D cosponsors

AB 2234 — Planning and zoning: housing: postentitlement phase permits.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 651, Statutes of 2022.

Track this bill free

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

  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 15, 2022. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 78% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 4 sponsors

    1 primary, 3 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (4 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 10 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) Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each public agency to provide a development project applicant with a list that specifies the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. The act requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain specified timeframes. Existing law requires a city, county, or special district to provide specified information, including a current schedule of fees, exactions, and affordability requirements applicable to a proposed housing development project, and an archive of impact fee nexus studies, cost of service studies, or equivalent studies, conducted by the city, county, or special district, on its internet website. The Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, specified housing development projects, including projects for very low, low, or moderate-income households and projects for emergency shelters, that comply with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete, unless the local agency makes specified written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record. The act authorizes a project applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the housing development or emergency shelter, or a housing organization to bring a lawsuit to enforce its provisions. This bill would require a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, as defined, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects, as defined, in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. The bill would define "local agency" for these purposes to mean a city, county, or city and county. This bill would require a local agency, beginning on specified dates determined by population size, to provide an option for postentitlement phase permits to be applied for, completed, and retrieved by the applicant on its internet website, and accept applications for postentitlement phase permits and any related documentation by electronic mail until that process has been established. The bill would require the local agency to list on their internet website or provide by electronic mail upon request, as applicable, the current processing status of the applicant's permit. This bill would establish time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant, and whether to approve or deny an application, as specified, and would make any failure to meet these time limits a disapproval of the housing development project and a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. The bill would define specified terms for its purposes. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Coastal Act of 1976 provides for the planning and regulation of development, under a coastal development permit process, within the coastal zone, as defined, based on various coastal resources planning and management policies set forth in the act. This bill would provide that the above provisions would not apply to permits required and issued by specified government agencies, including permits required and issued by the California Coastal Commission. (3) The Housing Accountability Act also requires a housing development project to be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application is submitted, except as specified. Existing law specifies the act does not prohibit a housing development project that is an affordable housing project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards adopted after the preliminary application was submitted if the project has not commenced construction within 3.5 years. Existing law defines "affordable housing project" for purposes of those provisions to mean a housing development in which units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years, among other things. This bill would instead require either that units within the development be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing or that the first purchaser of each unit participate in an equity sharing agreement, as specified. (4) 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, counties, and cities and counties, including charter cities, counties, and cities and counties. (5) 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. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 651, Statutes of 2022.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 72. Noes 0.).

  5. Assembly Rule 77(a) suspended.

  6. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 26 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  7. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 1. Page 5061.).

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  12. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (August 11).

  13. In committee: Referred to suspense file.

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

  15. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (June 21).

  16. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HOUSING. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 15). Re-referred to Com. on HOUSING.

  17. 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.

  18. Referred to Coms. on GOV. & F. and HOUSING.

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

  20. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 4921.)

  21. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  22. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 18).

  23. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  24. Read second time and amended.

  25. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 27).

  26. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 20). Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.

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

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

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

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

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

  32. From printer. May be heard in committee March 18.

  33. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 3 co-sponsors · 118 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (3)

Not signed on (118)

118 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 118 →

"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

Passed 72 Yea · 0 Nay · 8 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 30002
Unaffiliated 35004
Republican 7002
Total 72008
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Voepel — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Holden — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Salas — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Maienschein — 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
Cooper — Yea
Gray — Not Voting
Bloom — Not Voting
Cunningham — Not Voting
Bigelow — Not Voting
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
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 Not Voting
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
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 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 Not Voting
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Not Voting
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 36 Yea · 1 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 12001
Unaffiliated 20102
Republican 4000
Total 36103
% of votes cast 90%3%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Borgeas — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Pan — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Newman — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Melendez — Nay
Bates — Not Voting
Min — Not Voting
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Not Voting
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

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 2000
Unaffiliated 3001
Republican 1000
Total 6001
% of votes cast 86%0%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Bates — Not Voting
Laird, John Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 5000
Democratic 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bradford — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Bates — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 3000
Democratic 5000
Republican 0001
Total 8001
% of votes cast 89%0%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Roth — 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 Not Voting

Official roll call →

Passed 74 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 28002
Unaffiliated 38001
Republican 8001
Total 74004
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (78)
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
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Wood — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Ting — Yea
Low — Yea
Levine — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Daly — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Medina — Yea
Gray — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Cooper — Yea
O'Donnell — Not Voting
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 Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Not Voting
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 Yea
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 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 Not Voting
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7001
Democratic 7000
Republican 1000
Total 15001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Levine — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Holden — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Vince Fong — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 2000
Democratic 5000
Republican 0001
Total 7001
% of votes cast 88%0%0%13%
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 Not Voting

Official roll call →

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 3000
Democratic 3001
Total 7001
% 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

Official roll call →

Subjects

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 2234 do?
(1) Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, which is part of the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each public agency to provide a development project applicant with a list that specifies the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project. The act requires public agencies to approve or disapprove of a development project within certain specified timeframes. Existing law requires a city, county, or special district to provide specified information, including a current schedule of fees, exactions, and affordability requirements applicable to a proposed housing development project, and an archive of impact fee nexus studies, cost of service studies, or equivalent studies, conducted by the city, county, or special district, on its internet website. The Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, specified housing development projects, including projects for very low, low, or moderate-income households and projects for emergency shelters, that comply with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete, unless the local agency makes specified written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record. The act authorizes a project applicant, a person who would be eligible to apply for residency in the housing development or emergency shelter, or a housing organization to bring a lawsuit to enforce its provisions. This bill would require a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, as defined, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects, as defined, in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. The bill would define "local agency" for these purposes to mean a city, county, or city and county. This bill would require a local agency, beginning on specified dates determined by population size, to provide an option for postentitlement phase permits to be applied for, completed, and retrieved by the applicant on its internet website, and accept applications for postentitlement phase permits and any related documentation by electronic mail until that process has been established. The bill would require the local agency to list on their internet website or provide by electronic mail upon request, as applicable, the current processing status of the applicant's permit. This bill would establish time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant, and whether to approve or deny an application, as specified, and would make any failure to meet these time limits a disapproval of the housing development project and a violation of the Housing Accountability Act. The bill would define specified terms for its purposes. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Coastal Act of 1976 provides for the planning and regulation of development, under a coastal development permit process, within the coastal zone, as defined, based on various coastal resources planning and management policies set forth in the act. This bill would provide that the above provisions would not apply to permits required and issued by specified government agencies, including permits required and issued by the California Coastal Commission. (3) The Housing Accountability Act also requires a housing development project to be subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when a preliminary application is submitted, except as specified. Existing law specifies the act does not prohibit a housing development project that is an affordable housing project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards adopted after the preliminary application was submitted if the project has not commenced construction within 3.5 years. Existing law defines "affordable housing project" for purposes of those provisions to mean a housing development in which units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years, among other things. This bill would instead require either that units within the development be subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for owner-occupied housing or that the first purchaser of each unit participate in an equity sharing agreement, as specified. (4) 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, counties, and cities and counties, including charter cities, counties, and cities and counties. (5) 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 2234?
AB 2234 is sponsored by Rivas, Robert (Democratic), Grayson, Timothy S. (Democratic), Wicks, Buffy (Democratic), and Wiener, Scott D. (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 2234?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 15, 2022. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 2234?
Track AB 2234 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2234

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 2234

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →