Update: Bills Opposed by the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles

Bills Opposed by the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles

June 16, 2023

• Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 3: “Wealth Tax” (Lee) – Would authorize the Legislature to impose a tax upon all forms of personal property or wealth, whether tangible or intangible, and would require any tax so imposed to be administered and collected by the Franchise Tax Board and the Department of Justice, as determined by the Legislature in statute. (Note: Gov. Newsom apparently against this bill.)
• Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10: “Right to Housing” (Haney) – The state hereby recognizes the fundamental human right to adequate housing for everyone in California. It is the shared obligation of state and local jurisdictions to respect, protect, and fulfill this right, on a non-discriminatory and equitable basis, with a view to progressively achieve the full realization of the right, by all appropriate means, including the adoption and amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available resources.
• Assembly Bill 12: “Security Deposits” (Haney) - This bill would prohibit a landlord from demanding or receiving security for a rental agreement for residential property in an amount or value in excess of an amount equal to one month’s rent, regardless of whether the residential property is unfurnished or furnished, in addition to any rent for the first month paid on or before initial occupancy.
• Assembly Bill 309: “Social Housing” (Lee) - The Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act establishes the Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Housing Finance Agency and sets forth various programs administered by those entities intended to provide solutions for housing problems. This bill would define “social housing” for purposes of the Zenovich-Moscone-Chacon Housing and Home Finance Act and make findings and declarations relating to social housing and would state the intent of the Legislature is to further the Social Housing Act to address the shortage of affordable homes by developing housing for people of all income levels, prioritizing low-income households.
• Assembly Bill 548: “Inspection” (Boerner / Horvath) - This bill would require local enforcement agencies to develop policies and procedures for inspecting a building with multiple units if an inspector or code enforcement officer has determined that a unit is substandard or is in violation of the State Housing Law, and the inspector or code enforcement officer determines that the defects or violations have the potential to affect other units of the building, as specified. By imposing new duties on local government officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
• Assembly Bill 1620: “Costa-Hawkins: Permanent Disabilities: Comparable or Smaller Units” (Zbur) - This bill would require an owner of a residential real property subject to an ordinance that controls the rental rate to permit a tenant who is current on their rent and who has a permanent disability related to mobility to move to an available comparable or smaller unit located on the first floor of the building. The bill would require an owner who grants such a request to allow the tenant to retain their lease at the same rental rate and terms of the existing lease if, among other things, the move is necessary to accommodate the tenant’s disability and the new dwelling or unit is in the same building or on the same parcel with at least 3 other units.
• Senate Bill 267: “Persons Receiving Government Subsidies” (Eggman) - This bill would prohibit the use of a person’s credit history as part of the application process for a rental housing without offering the applicant the option of providing alternative evidence of financial responsibility and ability to pay in instances in which there is a government rent subsidy. The bill would require the housing provider to consider alternative evidence in lieu of the person’s credit history in determining whether to offer the rental accommodation to the applicant.
• Senate Bill 567: “Tenancy” (Durazo) – This bill would make a landlord who demands, accepts, receives, or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum rent increase allowed on or after March 1, 2023, as prescribed, liable in a civil action to the tenant. This bill would further authorize a local government, within whose jurisdiction the residential property is located, to enforce the bills provisions and bring an action for injunctive relief, as specified. (Opposed by CalRHA)
• Senate Bill 611: “Advertisement of Rental Properties” (Menjivar) –This bill would require landlords who advertise or provide a quote for residential property for rent and who include a specific or range of monthly rent rates to include specified information in the monthly rate. The bill would require the advertisement to include specified information if a payment, fee, deposit, or charge is required to be paid prior to, or at the beginning of, the tenancy. The bill would authorize the advertisement or quote to state the ongoing monthly rate after the tenant pays all one-time payments, fees, deposits, and charges. The bill would require the additional amount of security deposit to be returned to the tenant after no more than 6 months of residency if the tenant is not in arrears for any rent due during that period. and if the higher amount is not due to a prior history of residential property damage.
• Senate Bill 863: “Notices to Cure” (Allen, D-Los Angeles) – Existing law specifies that if the violation is not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, existing law authorizes a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure to be served to terminate the tenancy. This bill would remove the requirement that the notice to terminate for cause that is a curable lease violation be given pursuant to those provisions and would instead specify that the time period to cure the violation set forth in the notice shall not be less than 7 days, after which time, if the violation is not cured, a 3-day notice to quit without an opportunity to cure may thereafter be served to terminate the tenancy.

Protect Your Property Value: Help AAGLA’s

Contribute to a Cause Advocacy Efforts!