California

Subscribe to California via RSS

To address the housing crisis in California, Senate Bill 684 (SB 684), passed in 2023 but effective as of July 1, 2024, aims to simplify the approval process for small-scale for-sale housing projects, facilitate a quicker development process, and help to alleviate the state’s housing shortage. Specifically, SB 684 mandates local agencies to ministerially approve proposed subdivisions for housing projects that result in 10 or fewer parcels, provided they meet specific criteria.[1] Applications for up to 10 units as part of a housing development on lots subdivided using this process and for building permits for construction of the units are also ministerial.[2] This streamlined, CEQA-exempt approval process applies to tract maps on lots zoned for multifamily residential development, no larger than 5 acres, substantially surrounded by qualified urban uses[3] and “infill” sites.Continue Reading Big Streamlining for Small Subdivision Developers

Until recently, local policies on homelessness have been guided by two controversial rulings from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: Martin v. Boise (9th Cir. 2019) 920 F.3d 584 and Johnson v. City of Grants Pass (9th Cir. 2022) 50 F.4th 787.[1] However, the Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (2024) 603 U.S. ____, is likely to transform local jurisdictions’ policy approaches to managing homelessness. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the city’s ban on camping and parking overnight on public property.Continue Reading Supreme Court Holds That the Eighth Amendment Does Not Prevent Enforcement of Local Camping Bans, Authorizing a Significant Shift in Local Policies on Homelessness

Creating certainty in the inherent uncertainty of the future is the name of the game when it comes to drafting commercial leases. When courts overrule provisions that the parties to the lease have agreed upon, however, that supposed certainty goes out the window. This fact pattern played out recently in Epochal Enterprises, Inc. v. LF Encinitas Properties, LLC (4th Dist., Case No. D079905) (“Epochal”), when the California Court of Appeal ruled that a limitation of liability clause in a lease that purported to release the landlord from liability for failing to disclose asbestos was against public policy and not enforceable.Continue Reading New Court Ruling Pokes Holes in Contractual Limitation of Liability Language in Commercial Leases

The California State Legislature is considering Assembly Bill (AB) 2216, a measure introduced by Assemblymember Matt Haney, that would force landlords to permit pets in residential rental properties. Specifically, the proposed legislation restricts a landlord from barring a tenant from owning or keeping a common household pet without valid justification. The bill also prevents landlords from charging tenants extra rent or security deposits for owning or keeping a common household pet. However, these restrictions do not apply to rental agreements signed before January 1, 2025.Continue Reading Unleashing AB 2216: Will Fido Have a Leg Up on Landlords?

Last year, California became the first state to pass laws requiring companies to make disclosures about their greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions as well as the risks that climate change poses for their businesses and their plans for addressing those risks. These new laws now face funding and legal hurdles that are delaying their implementation.Continue Reading Recent Updates to State and Federal Climate Disclosure Laws

In its recent decision in Hilltop Group Inc. v. County of San Diego, California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal issued a number of holdings that resulted in a strong ruling in support of streamlined environmental review for projects that are consistent with and within the scope of a program environmental impact report (EIR) for a general plan. The Court clarified that CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (“Section 15183”) does not permit additional environmental review for such projects except as necessary to determine whether a project will have significant effects that are peculiar to the project or the site that were not analyzed in the prior EIR and cannot be substantially mitigated by uniformly applied development policies or standards. The Court went on to hold that public controversy and lay testimony about “peculiar” impacts that might arise from a project do not constitute substantial evidence sufficient to require further environmental review under Section 15183. Perhaps the most important lesson of Hilltop Group Inc. is that decisionmakers cannot err on the side of requiring environmental review simply because a project is controversial, particularly when streamlining is in play. If substantial evidence demonstrates a project’s environmental effects were studied in the prior general plan EIR or can be addressed through uniform policies and procedures, the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) does not permit the lead agency to require an EIR, mitigated negative declaration or other additional environmental review.Continue Reading A Win for Consistency Evaluations Under CEQA Guidelines 15183: Court Rules that Public Controversy is not a Basis for Additional Environmental Review

According to the Public Policy Institute of California, a non-profit, non-partisan think tank, California is facing a jaw-dropping 3.5 million unit housing deficient for the current population. This despite several legislative sessions enacting a large number of bills aimed at boosting housing production. 2023 was no different. During its first year of the current 2-year legislative cycle, Governor Newsom signed an unprecedented 56 housing bills into law, reflecting the California Legislature’s continued effort to respond to the housing crisis, and the multi-dimensional approach to developing, retaining, and permitting housing options for Californians. In sum, the housing bills intend to incentivize and reduce barriers to housing production, especially “affordable” or below-market rate housing by addressing previously-identified hurdles in the market. To do so, some bills include further expansion of State Density Bonus Law, including Senate Bill (SB) 423’s extension of the sunset date in 2017’s SB 35. The package also includes bills aimed to keep tenants in their existing homes and reflects the state’s desire to limit local governments’ ability to deny housing projects.Continue Reading California Continues Trend of Pushing Housing Legislation to Address Ongoing Housing Shortage

On January 30, 2024, the San Diego City Council approved an ordinance implementing Mayor Todd Gloria’s proposal to establish an extensive project labor agreement (“PLA”), which is slated to impose various conditions and restrictions on most City-funded construction projects. Most notably, the PLA establishes conditions of employment and minimum wage requirements, additional safety protocols, and other regulations imposed on contractors and their subcontractors. The PLA also sets goals and introduces incentives for the hiring of certain “Targeted Workers,” which include homeless people, the undereducated, and those that have spent time in jail or prison.Continue Reading San Diego City Council Approves Union-Friendly Citywide Project Labor Agreement Restricting Most City Construction Projects