Current law requires a 66% supermajority to pass bond measures funding affordable housing and infrastructure; this means a minority of 35% of voters can block funding for affordable housing in any given jurisdiction. Proposition 5 would change this threshold, requiring a 55% majority to pass affordable housing bond measures. Proposition 5 was placed on our ballot by ACA 1 (sponsored by Assemblymembers Aguiar-Curry, Berman, and Haney) which was later slightly modified by ACA 10 (Aguiar-Curry). EBHO Supported both ACA 1 and ACA 10.

Will propose to voters a constitutional amendment to lower the necessary vote threshold from a two-thirds supermajority (67%) to 55% to approve local general obligation (GO) bonds and special taxes for aAims to increase utilization of housing vouchers funded by the Federal Government. Does so by creating a program, run through the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), to incentivize landlords to accept Federal Housing Vouchers. Would also require the local Housing Authorities that administer these vouchers to work with HCD on applying evidence-based tools to increase their success rates (the number of families who successfully use their voucher to lease a home). EBHO Supported this Bill.

The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) administers the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) which is funding provided by the federal government to build affordable housing developments. This bill instructs TCAC to establish a limit on annual rent increases in properties funded by LIHTC before June 30 2025, and then re-assess that limit annually. EBHO tracked this bill but did not take a formal support or oppose position.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) often supports the development of rental housing by providing 55-year deferred loans to housing developers. However, these loans are currently only available after the construction phase of development. AB 1053 allows HCD to provide the loans earlier in the development process, saving developers a significant amount of money that they would otherwise spend on more expensive loans during the construction phase of development. EBHO Supported this Bill.

When a local jurisdiction (City or County) is not in compliance with its Housing Element (8 year plan to provide housing at all income levels), developers are allowed to bypass that jurisdiction’s approval process for new housing developments for which at least 20% of the units are affordable to those with Low Incomes. AB 1893 would lower this threshold to 13%. This would mean that when a jurisdiction is not in compliance with its Housing Element, developers could proceed without any approval process and build developments within which 13% of the homes are affordable to low income residents. EBHO Opposed this Bill.

Affordable Housing developments are largely exempt from basic property taxes because they are deemed to be a “charitable” use of that land and property—this is known as a “welfare exemption.” However, the managers and developers of affordable housing must pay all taxes on their properties until the properties are reviewed by the state Board of Equalization and the County Assessor, at which time they are reimbursed for these taxes. AB 2353 reverses this process, allowing the non-profit developers and managers to claim the exemption from the start, and requiring back taxes to be paid if the BOE and Assessor determine the exemption has been claimed improperly. EBHO Supported this Bill.

The California Preservation Law requires that when an owner of affordable housing is looking to convert that housing to market rate housing, they first allow an opportunity for potential buyers who will preserve the affordability of the homes to purchase the housing. AB 2926 closes several key loopholes in the California Preservation Law, namely that the owner looking to convert the affordable housing would now be required to accept bona fide offers made by those looking to preserve affordability (before, the owner was required to hear the offer, but not required to accept it). EBHO Supported this Bill.

Every eight years Regional and Local Governments create plans to provide housing at all income levels within their jurisdiction. At the Regional Level, these plans are called Regional Housing Needs Allocations (RHNA) and at the Local level they are called Housing Elements. AB 3093 requires RHNAs and Housing Elements to not only state how much “Very Low Income” housing will be available in each jurisdiction, but to specifically name how much housing will be available at “Acutely Low” and “Extremely Low” income levels. These income levels have specific meanings as defined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. EBHO Supported this Bill.

California has a state-level version of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). For the past several years, the amount of the credit has been determined and negotiated through each year’s budget process. AB 3160 would lock in the amount of the credit at $500 million annually through 2030. EBHO Supported this Bill.

California has a state-level version of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC). For the past several Developers of all types pay various fees to local jurisdictions during the process of developing a property. These include both administrative fees and “impact fees” that the developers of market rate housing pay to support the funding of affordable housing in their jurisdiction. SB 937 would allow developers of housing to defer payments of all fees until after the construction process, when the certificate of occupancy is issued. EBHO Opposed this Bill as Written, but offered support if it was amended to exclude Impact Fees which we believe developers should be required to pay in a timely manner.

SB 1210 would require utility companies to publicly post their schedule of fees for service connection, capacity, or other connection charges and the estimated timeframes for completing service connections. EBHO Supported this Bill.

The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) regulates the benefits and taxes associated with generating solar power on private property. Currently, the system treats properties with one tenant differently than properties with multiple tenants, making the installation and maintenance of solar panels on multifamily housing developments particularly costly. SB 1374 eliminates this tiered system and requires CPUC to use the same taxation system for solar power on multifamily homes as it does on single family homes. EBHO Supported this Bill.

This bill creates a Federal Housing Voucher Acceleration Program, with an accompanying $200M funding allocation (see note below), to provide resources to public housing authorities (PHAs) to increase voucher utilizations, including housing navigation, landlord incentives, and security deposits. Funds would be allocated based on the number of public housing and Section 8 vouchers maintained by the housing authority and the success rate, defined as % of new voucher families that successfully lease a unit.

Creates a statewide Tenant & Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA/COPA) program for the sale of rental properties. Tenants, affordable housing providers, and local public entities would be given the right of first refusal to match the highest offer made by any other type of bidder during the sale process. Properties acquired would be subject to permanent affordability restrictions, just cause eviction protections, and could only be resold at an affordable price.

Allows developers to receive HCD loan funds during construction, reducing the costs of developing affordable housing. HCD must deposit the loan funds with the first lender at or before the closing of the first lender’s construction loan.

This bill would exempt fair housing investigators from California’s eavesdropping laws, allowing fair housing testers to record conversations to investigate and expose illegal housing discrimination. Testers working for a fair housing organization or the Civil Rights Department will be able to record evidence for use in judicial, administrative, legislative, and other proceedings.

Authorizes $10B in general obligation bonds to support the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing and permanent supportive housing. Proceeds would be used to finance programs to fund affordable rental housing and homeownership programs, including, among others, the Multifamily Housing Program, the CalHome Program, and the Joe Serna, Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program.

Establishes CAPP to provide resources to affordable housing developers, community organizations, and local jurisdictions to acquire unsubsidized rental housing from the private market, and local jurisdictions to acquire unsubsidized rental housing from the private market, reduce tenants’ risk of displacement and preserve housing as affordable rental housing or homeownership opportunities.

This bill would have placed a $10 billion bond on the November 2024 ballot to support the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable homes and permanent supportive housing. This would have included $5.2 billion for the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) , $1.75 billion to supportive housing administered through MHP, $1 billion for programs to preserve and rehabilitate existing rental housing, $1 billion to the CalHOMES program, and $500 million to the Joe Serna Junior Farmworker Housing program. EBHO Supported this Bill; legislators were limited in how many bond measures they could place on the November ballot and chose to hold this one, putting forward a $10 billion schools bond and a $10 billion bond to address Climate Change.

The Portfolio Reinvestment Program finances the rehabilitation of older developments that serve the lowest income Californians and are often have no options for financing repairs in the private market. AB 1789 would have expanded eligibility for receiving financing through the program to any homes that are at least 15 years old and have an average affordability of 45% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or less, while continuing to prioritize homes that meet the current requirements. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Senate Appropriations committee.

Currently, home owners can claim a state tax deduction for interest paid on a home mortgage. Those who own second homes or vacation homes and pay interest on the mortgages for those properties may claim the deduction twice each time they file their taxes. It is estimated that deductions claimed for second homes costs the state of California $200 million per year. AB 1932 would have limited taxpayers to claiming the deduction only for a primary residence. It dedicated the revenue generated by this change to the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP), First Time Homebuyer programs, and programs supporting the use of rental assistance vouchers. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

This bill would have directed the State Treasurer and other state housing agencies to study the feasibility of creating a large-scale state-led homeownership financing program aimed at lower and moderate-income Californians. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

This bill would have created the State Partnership for Affordable Housing Registries in California (SPAHRC) Grant Program requiring HCD to disburse funds to eligible local entitles to launch a platform for affordable housing listings, information, and applications in two phases. The databases would have allowed prospective affordable housing tenants to view available listings, access the database in multiple languages, and store their information for reuse in other listings. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

This bill would have prohibited business entities and investment firms that own more than 1,000 single family properties from purchasing additional single family homes to rent. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

SB 4, or The Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023 guarantees by-right approval process for Faith Based and Nonprofit Educational institutions proposing the development of affordable homes on their property. AB 2728 would have enhanced and strengthened SB 4 by requiring the department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to provide technical support to Faith Based and Nonprofit Educational Institutions so they would be better prepared to take advantage of SB 4. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

This bill would have created the Community Anti-Displacement and Preservation Program (CAPP) to prevent displacement and homelessness by financing the acquisition of currently unsubsidized rental housing and preserving it as affordable while stabilizing current residents. EBHO Supported this Bill. It was ordered to the Inactive File before a vote on the Assembly Floor.

This bill would have required bond measures on state and local ballots to include specific language regarding the cost of the interest on the bond. While this information is already available in Voter Information Guides, SB 986 would have required it be included in the 75 word ballot label as well (the language would take up at least 27 of those words). EBHO Opposed this Bill. It failed to pass out of the Senate Elections Committee.

This bill would have authorized a regional ballot measure, administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), to generate $750 million per year in revenue to support operations for transit systems, improve service, and improve roadways and other transportation projects. It would have also required MTC to conduct a study on the consolidation of Bay Area Public Transit Agencies. EBHO offered Support for this Bill if Amended to prohibit the revenue from being used to fund highway widening projects and if was guaranteed that the measure would propose a progressive revenue source. It was held on the Assembly floor.

Under the California Surplus Land Act (SLA), California Public Agencies that wish to sell or lease a property must give affordable housing developers the first opportunity to purchase that property before making it available to other potential buyers. The department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is responsible for the implementation of this act. SB 1134 would have slowed HCD’s ability to implement new guidelines for the implementation of the SLA by requiring them to follow administrative procedures to issue formal regulations, rather than the current standard of issuing departmental guidelines. EBHO Opposed this Bill. It was ordered to the Inactive File before a vote on the Assembly Floor.

Currently, LLCs and other similar entities must register with the CA Secretary of State upon creation and provide certain information, which is publicly accessible. SB 1201 would have required that the publicly available information include the beneficial owner(s) of the company (those who have substantial control over the entity and its finances/profits). EBHO Supported this Bill. It was pulled before a vote in the Assembly Banking and Finance Committee.

This bill would have prohibited investment firms and hedge funds from purchasing or acquiring single family homes in California, starting in 2025, but would have exempted nonprofit organizations and other entities constructing or rehabilitating housing. EBHO Supported this Bill. Its hearing on the Senate Floor was cancelled.

Under the California Surplus Land Act (SLA), California Public Agencies that wish to sell or lease a property must give affordable housing developers the first opportunity to purchase that property before making it available to other potential buyers. SB 1439 would have exempted a few specific sites from the SLA to facilitate their sale to Sutter Health. EBHO Opposed this Bill. It failed to pass out of the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.