California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: Enacted 2 D cosponsors

AB 480 — Surplus land.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 788, Statutes of 2023.

  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 07, 2023. Enacted.

Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom (Democratic) on October 11, 2023.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 76% · 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.

  • 3 sponsors

    1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (2 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

Existing law prescribes requirements for the disposal of surplus land by a local agency, as defined, and requires, except as provided, a local agency disposing of surplus land to comply with certain notice requirements before disposing of the land or participating in negotiations to dispose of the land with a prospective transferee, particularly that the local agency send a notice of availability to specified entities that have notified the Department of Housing and Community Development of their interest in surplus land, as specified. Under existing law, if the local agency receives a notice of interest, the local agency is required to engage in good faith negotiations with the entity desiring to purchase or lease the surplus land. This bill would define the term "dispose" to mean the sale of the surplus property or a lease of any surplus property entered into on or after January 1, 2024, for a term longer than 15 years, including renewal options, as specified. The bill would provide that "dispose" does not include entering a lease for surplus land on which no development or demolition will occur, regardless of the term of the lease. Existing law requires a local agency to take formal action in a regular public meeting to declare that land is surplus and is not necessary for the agency's use and to declare land as either "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land," as supported by written findings, before a local agency may take any action to dispose of it consistent with an agency's policies or procedures. This bill would exempt a local agency, in specified instances, from making a declaration at a public meeting for land that is "exempt surplus land" if the local agency identifies the land in a notice that is published and available for public comment at least 30 days before the exemption takes effect. Existing law defines "exempt surplus land," for which a local agency is not required to follow the requirements for disposal of surplus land, except as provided, as, among other things, surplus land that is put out to open, competitive bid by a local agency for specified housing and mixed-use development purposes, and surplus land that is subject to valid legal restrictions that are not imposed by the local agency and that would make housing prohibited, as specified. This bill would recast the definition of "exempt surplus land" with respect to surplus land for specified housing purposes, to remove the requirement that it be put out to open, competitive bid. The bill would also include within the definition of "exempt surplus land" surplus land totaling 10 or more acres, consisting of a single parcel, or of 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels totaling 10 or more acres, combined for disposition to one or more buyers pursuant to a plan or ordinance adopted by the legislative body of the local agency, or a state statute, as specified. The bill would require that land be subject to an open, competitive bid process, as specified, and that the development satisfy certain requirements. The bill would make a violation of these provisions subject to specified penalties. The bill would also require that a local agency that disposes of land pursuant to those provisions do so through a disposition and development agreement containing specified provisions. The bill would also require, with respect to surplus land that is subject to valid legal restrictions, that the legal restrictions described above be supported by documentary evidence and written findings, as specified. The bill would require that certain surplus land be transferred with a covenant or restriction recorded against the land at the time of sale, as specified. By narrowing the circumstances under which certain surplus land may be defined as "exempt surplus land" and, therefore, expanding the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines "exempt surplus land" to include surplus land that a local agency is exchanging for another property necessary for the agency's use. This bill would include easements necessary for the agency's use for purposes of that provision. Existing law specifies that, for purposes of these provisions, the term "exempt surplus land," includes, among other things, surplus land that is put out to open, competitive bid by a local agency, as specified, for purposes of a mixed-use development that is more than one acre in area, that includes not less than 300 housing units, and that restricts at least 25% of the residential units to lower income households with an affordable sales price or an affordable rent for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for ownership housing. This bill would modify these provisions to require that the mixed-use development include not less than 300 residential units, would modify the affordability restriction to 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands, and would require the restrictions to be recorded, as specified. Existing law also defines exempt surplus land as, among other things, land that was transferred by the state to a local agency, as specified, that includes residential units that are restricted to persons and families of low or moderate income with an affordable sales price or rent, at least 80% of which shall be restricted to persons and families of lower income. This bill would expand the definition of exempt surplus land to include land that is owned by a California public-use airport on which residential use is prohibited pursuant to specified federal law. The bill would expand in the definition of exempt surplus land to also include certain mixed-use developments that meet specified conditions, including that at least 25% of the residential units are restricted to lower income households and at least 50% of the square footage of the new construction is designated for residential use, and surplus land owned by a local agency whose primary mission or purpose is to supply the public with a transportation system that is developed for commercial, or industrial uses or activities, for the sole purpose of investment if certain conditions are met. The bill would also modify exemptions related to land transferred after activation of a parking authority and land that is a former military base to include an affordability restriction of 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands. Existing law requires any local agency disposing of surplus land to send a written notice of availability of the property to specified entities. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to maintain on its internet website a list of all notices of availability throughout the state. This bill would require the department to also maintain on its internet website a list of all entities, including housing sponsors, that have notified the department of their interest in surplus land for the purpose of developing low- and moderate-income housing. This bill would also specify that certain actions are not considered "participating in negotiations" for purposes of the above-described notice of availability requirement, including issuing a request for proposals or negotiating a lease for purposes of complying with specified provisions of law. The bill would make other nonsubstantive changes to provisions that describe the entities to which notices of availability for developing low- and moderate-income housing, for open-space purposes, and for school facilities construction are required to be sent. Existing law requires an entity proposing to use the surplus land for developing low- and moderate-income housing to agree to make available not less than 25% of the total number of units developed on the parcels at affordable housing cost for a period of at least 55 years. This bill would instead require the entity to require requirement to agree to make available not less than 25% of the total number of units developed on the parcels at affordable housing cost for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing, land use for ownership housing, and 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands. Existing law specifies that after the disposing agency has received a notice of interest from the entity desiring to purchase or lease the land, if price or terms cannot be agreed upon after a good faith negotiation period, the land may be disposed of, as specified. This bill would recast that provision to state that after the specified good faith negotiation, the local agency may dispose of the surplus land, as specified. Existing law proclaims that nothing in these provisions relating to the disposition of surplus property shall preclude a local agency, housing authority, or redevelopment agency that purchases land from a disposing agency from reconveying the land to a nonprofit or for-profit housing developer for development of low- and moderate-income housing. This bill would modify that provision to remove reference to housing authorities and redevelopment agencies and make other nonsubstantive changes. Existing law specifies that any public agency disposing of surplus land to a specified entity that intends to use the land for park or recreation purposes, for open-space purposes, for school purposes, or for low- and moderate-income housing purposes may provide for a payment period of up to 20 years in any contract of sale or sale by trust deed for the land. This bill would modify those provisions to refer, instead, to a local agency disposing of surplus land. Existing law authorizes a local agency to negotiate concurrently with all entities that provide notice of interest for the purpose of developing affordable housing that meets specified requirements. This bill would modify that provision to reference low- and moderate-income housing that meets specified requirements. The bill would make other nonsubstantive changes to this provision. Existing law makes a local agency that disposes of land in violation of these provisions after receiving notice from the Department of Housing and Community Development liable for a penalty of 30% of the final sale price of the surplus land sold for a first violation and 50% for any subsequent violation. This bill would, instead, make a local agency that disposes of surplus land in violation of these provisions, except as specified, after receiving a notification from the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified, that the local agency is in violation of these provisions liable for a penalty of 30% of the applicable disposition value, which the bill would define. This bill would prohibit the penalties for violating these provisions from applying to nonsubstantive violations that do not impact the availability or construction of housing affordable to lower income households or the ultimate disposition of the land, as specified. The bill would make nonsubstantive changes to, and correct an erroneous cross-reference in, those provisions. Existing law provides that certain dispositions of real property by local agencies are subject to surplus land disposal procedures as they existed on December 31, 2019, if those dispositions are pursuant to specified legal agreements and the disposition is completed by December 31, 2022, or by December 31, 2024, if the property is located in a charter city with a population of over 2,000,000 persons and a local agency has an option agreement duly authorized by the governing body to purchase the property from a former redevelopment agency. This bill would instead subject dispositions of real property by local agencies to surplus land disposal procedures as they existed on December 31, 2019, if those dispositions are pursuant to specified legal agreements and the dispositions are completed by December 31, 2027. The bill would authorize a local agency that terminated an exclusive negotiating agreement or legally binding agreement to dispose of property, as specified, to elect whether to ask the requisite party to consider reviving the terminated agreement, and would make the revived agreement subject to these provisions, as applicable. This bill would specify that the law governing surplus land does not require a local agency to dispose of land that is determined to be surplus. 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. This bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of SB 747 of the 2023–24 Regular Session. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54221 of the Government Code proposed by SB 747 to be operative only if this bill and SB 747 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 788, Statutes of 2023.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

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

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 60. Noes 13. Page 3578.).

  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 31. Noes 8. Page 2729.).

  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: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (September 1).

  11. In committee: Referred to APPR suspense file.

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

  13. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 2.) (July 10). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  15. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HOUSING. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (June 28).

  16. 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.

  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 53. Noes 16. Page 1698.)

  21. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  22. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 4.) (May 17).

  23. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (April 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  25. Read second time and amended.

  26. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (March 29).

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

  30. From printer. May be heard in committee March 10.

  31. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on · 21 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Ting

Co-sponsors (2)

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

Passed 60 Yea · 13 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 44003
Unaffiliated 15302
Republican 11002
Total 601307
% of votes cast 75%16%0%9%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Ting — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Low — Yea
Wood — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Essayli — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Waldron — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Vince Fong — Not Voting
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Not Voting
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Not Voting
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Not Voting
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Not Voting
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Davies, Laurie Republican Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Not Voting
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Hoover, Josh Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay
Ta, Tri Republican Nay
Wallis, Greg Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 31 Yea · 8 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 10100
Democratic 20101
Republican 1600
Total 31801
% of votes cast 78%20%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Roth — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Newman — Yea
Min — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wilk — Nay
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Not Voting
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Niello, Roger W. Republican Nay
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Nay
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 9 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 8000
Unaffiliated 1000
Republican 0200
Total 9200
% of votes cast 82%18%0%0%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Skinner — Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Nay
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 6 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4000
Republican 0101
Unaffiliated 2000
Total 6101
% of votes cast 75%13%0%13%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Glazer — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 53 Yea · 16 Nay · 11 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 39008
Unaffiliated 14501
Republican 01102
Total 5316011
% of votes cast 66%20%0%14%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Ting — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Low — Yea
Wood — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Essayli — Nay
Waldron — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Rodriguez — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Vince Fong — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Not Voting
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Not Voting
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Not Voting
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Not Voting
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Not Voting
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Not Voting
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Not Voting
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Not Voting
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Nay
Chen, Phillip Republican Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Davies, Laurie Republican Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Hoover, Josh Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Not Voting
Patterson, Joe Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay
Ta, Tri Republican Nay
Wallis, Greg Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 12 Yea · 4 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 10000
Unaffiliated 2100
Republican 0300
Total 12400
% of votes cast 75%25%0%0%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Mathis — Nay
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 6 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Unaffiliated 1000
Republican 0101
Total 6101
% of votes cast 75%13%0%13%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
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
Patterson, Joe Republican Not Voting
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Passed 6 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Unaffiliated 1100
Republican 0100
Total 6200
% of votes cast 75%25%0%0%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Boerner Horvath — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay

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 480 do?
Existing law prescribes requirements for the disposal of surplus land by a local agency, as defined, and requires, except as provided, a local agency disposing of surplus land to comply with certain notice requirements before disposing of the land or participating in negotiations to dispose of the land with a prospective transferee, particularly that the local agency send a notice of availability to specified entities that have notified the Department of Housing and Community Development of their interest in surplus land, as specified. Under existing law, if the local agency receives a notice of interest, the local agency is required to engage in good faith negotiations with the entity desiring to purchase or lease the surplus land. This bill would define the term "dispose" to mean the sale of the surplus property or a lease of any surplus property entered into on or after January 1, 2024, for a term longer than 15 years, including renewal options, as specified. The bill would provide that "dispose" does not include entering a lease for surplus land on which no development or demolition will occur, regardless of the term of the lease. Existing law requires a local agency to take formal action in a regular public meeting to declare that land is surplus and is not necessary for the agency's use and to declare land as either "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land," as supported by written findings, before a local agency may take any action to dispose of it consistent with an agency's policies or procedures. This bill would exempt a local agency, in specified instances, from making a declaration at a public meeting for land that is "exempt surplus land" if the local agency identifies the land in a notice that is published and available for public comment at least 30 days before the exemption takes effect. Existing law defines "exempt surplus land," for which a local agency is not required to follow the requirements for disposal of surplus land, except as provided, as, among other things, surplus land that is put out to open, competitive bid by a local agency for specified housing and mixed-use development purposes, and surplus land that is subject to valid legal restrictions that are not imposed by the local agency and that would make housing prohibited, as specified. This bill would recast the definition of "exempt surplus land" with respect to surplus land for specified housing purposes, to remove the requirement that it be put out to open, competitive bid. The bill would also include within the definition of "exempt surplus land" surplus land totaling 10 or more acres, consisting of a single parcel, or of 2 or more adjacent or nonadjacent parcels totaling 10 or more acres, combined for disposition to one or more buyers pursuant to a plan or ordinance adopted by the legislative body of the local agency, or a state statute, as specified. The bill would require that land be subject to an open, competitive bid process, as specified, and that the development satisfy certain requirements. The bill would make a violation of these provisions subject to specified penalties. The bill would also require that a local agency that disposes of land pursuant to those provisions do so through a disposition and development agreement containing specified provisions. The bill would also require, with respect to surplus land that is subject to valid legal restrictions, that the legal restrictions described above be supported by documentary evidence and written findings, as specified. The bill would require that certain surplus land be transferred with a covenant or restriction recorded against the land at the time of sale, as specified. By narrowing the circumstances under which certain surplus land may be defined as "exempt surplus land" and, therefore, expanding the duties of local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law defines "exempt surplus land" to include surplus land that a local agency is exchanging for another property necessary for the agency's use. This bill would include easements necessary for the agency's use for purposes of that provision. Existing law specifies that, for purposes of these provisions, the term "exempt surplus land," includes, among other things, surplus land that is put out to open, competitive bid by a local agency, as specified, for purposes of a mixed-use development that is more than one acre in area, that includes not less than 300 housing units, and that restricts at least 25% of the residential units to lower income households with an affordable sales price or an affordable rent for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing and 45 years for ownership housing. This bill would modify these provisions to require that the mixed-use development include not less than 300 residential units, would modify the affordability restriction to 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands, and would require the restrictions to be recorded, as specified. Existing law also defines exempt surplus land as, among other things, land that was transferred by the state to a local agency, as specified, that includes residential units that are restricted to persons and families of low or moderate income with an affordable sales price or rent, at least 80% of which shall be restricted to persons and families of lower income. This bill would expand the definition of exempt surplus land to include land that is owned by a California public-use airport on which residential use is prohibited pursuant to specified federal law. The bill would expand in the definition of exempt surplus land to also include certain mixed-use developments that meet specified conditions, including that at least 25% of the residential units are restricted to lower income households and at least 50% of the square footage of the new construction is designated for residential use, and surplus land owned by a local agency whose primary mission or purpose is to supply the public with a transportation system that is developed for commercial, or industrial uses or activities, for the sole purpose of investment if certain conditions are met. The bill would also modify exemptions related to land transferred after activation of a parking authority and land that is a former military base to include an affordability restriction of 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands. Existing law requires any local agency disposing of surplus land to send a written notice of availability of the property to specified entities. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to maintain on its internet website a list of all notices of availability throughout the state. This bill would require the department to also maintain on its internet website a list of all entities, including housing sponsors, that have notified the department of their interest in surplus land for the purpose of developing low- and moderate-income housing. This bill would also specify that certain actions are not considered "participating in negotiations" for purposes of the above-described notice of availability requirement, including issuing a request for proposals or negotiating a lease for purposes of complying with specified provisions of law. The bill would make other nonsubstantive changes to provisions that describe the entities to which notices of availability for developing low- and moderate-income housing, for open-space purposes, and for school facilities construction are required to be sent. Existing law requires an entity proposing to use the surplus land for developing low- and moderate-income housing to agree to make available not less than 25% of the total number of units developed on the parcels at affordable housing cost for a period of at least 55 years. This bill would instead require the entity to require requirement to agree to make available not less than 25% of the total number of units developed on the parcels at affordable housing cost for a minimum of 55 years for rental housing, land use for ownership housing, and 50 years for rental or ownership housing located on tribal trust lands. Existing law specifies that after the disposing agency has received a notice of interest from the entity desiring to purchase or lease the land, if price or terms cannot be agreed upon after a good faith negotiation period, the land may be disposed of, as specified. This bill would recast that provision to state that after the specified good faith negotiation, the local agency may dispose of the surplus land, as specified. Existing law proclaims that nothing in these provisions relating to the disposition of surplus property shall preclude a local agency, housing authority, or redevelopment agency that purchases land from a disposing agency from reconveying the land to a nonprofit or for-profit housing developer for development of low- and moderate-income housing. This bill would modify that provision to remove reference to housing authorities and redevelopment agencies and make other nonsubstantive changes. Existing law specifies that any public agency disposing of surplus land to a specified entity that intends to use the land for park or recreation purposes, for open-space purposes, for school purposes, or for low- and moderate-income housing purposes may provide for a payment period of up to 20 years in any contract of sale or sale by trust deed for the land. This bill would modify those provisions to refer, instead, to a local agency disposing of surplus land. Existing law authorizes a local agency to negotiate concurrently with all entities that provide notice of interest for the purpose of developing affordable housing that meets specified requirements. This bill would modify that provision to reference low- and moderate-income housing that meets specified requirements. The bill would make other nonsubstantive changes to this provision. Existing law makes a local agency that disposes of land in violation of these provisions after receiving notice from the Department of Housing and Community Development liable for a penalty of 30% of the final sale price of the surplus land sold for a first violation and 50% for any subsequent violation. This bill would, instead, make a local agency that disposes of surplus land in violation of these provisions, except as specified, after receiving a notification from the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified, that the local agency is in violation of these provisions liable for a penalty of 30% of the applicable disposition value, which the bill would define. This bill would prohibit the penalties for violating these provisions from applying to nonsubstantive violations that do not impact the availability or construction of housing affordable to lower income households or the ultimate disposition of the land, as specified. The bill would make nonsubstantive changes to, and correct an erroneous cross-reference in, those provisions. Existing law provides that certain dispositions of real property by local agencies are subject to surplus land disposal procedures as they existed on December 31, 2019, if those dispositions are pursuant to specified legal agreements and the disposition is completed by December 31, 2022, or by December 31, 2024, if the property is located in a charter city with a population of over 2,000,000 persons and a local agency has an option agreement duly authorized by the governing body to purchase the property from a former redevelopment agency. This bill would instead subject dispositions of real property by local agencies to surplus land disposal procedures as they existed on December 31, 2019, if those dispositions are pursuant to specified legal agreements and the dispositions are completed by December 31, 2027. The bill would authorize a local agency that terminated an exclusive negotiating agreement or legally binding agreement to dispose of property, as specified, to elect whether to ask the requisite party to consider reviving the terminated agreement, and would make the revived agreement subject to these provisions, as applicable. This bill would specify that the law governing surplus land does not require a local agency to dispose of land that is determined to be surplus. 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. This bill would make its operation contingent on the enactment of SB 747 of the 2023–24 Regular Session. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 54221 of the Government Code proposed by SB 747 to be operative only if this bill and SB 747 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Who sponsors AB 480?
AB 480 is sponsored by Ting, Caballero, Anna M. (Democratic), and Umberg, Thomas J. (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 480?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 07, 2023. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 480?
Track AB 480 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 480

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 480

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →