Agenda packet — Rancho Cucamonga City Council, October 7, 2026 (part 3 of 4)

LHMP Implementation Handbook 7
When Rancho Cucamonga Is Conducting Its Annual
Meeting Of The Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
The hazard mitigation planning process brings together representatives from multiple City departments, as well as other relevant stakeholders, and provides a forum to discuss the hazards in Rancho Cucamonga and how to mitigate them effectively. As mentioned in Chapter 6 of the LHMP, the HMPC should meet at least once each year, beginning a year after the LHMP is adopted. During these meetings, the HMPC should discuss implementation progress and integration of hazard mitigation actions in other City documents. At these meetings, the HMPC can review the status of the hazard mitigation actions and discuss whether completed or in-progress actions are working as expected. These meetings also allow the HMPC to strategically plan for the upcoming year.

It is recommended that these meetings occur early in the year to make integration into the annual budget process. Attachment 3 contains an example of an HMPC Meeting Agenda.

The annual meeting should include representatives from City departments and other organizations that originally prepared the LHMP. Representatives from other relevant organizations should also be invited. During the preparation of the LHMP, the following individuals were part of the HMPC:

RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
Name Title Department
Veronica Fincher Director Animal Care and Services
Chris Lebere Building and Safety Manager Building & Safety Zack Neighbors Director Building & Safety
Jennifer Camacho-Curtis Community Affairs Officer Engagement and Special Programs
Annette Mumolo Community Affairs Senior
Coordinator
Engagement and Special
Programs
Morgan Chavez Community Affairs Coordinator Engagement and Special Programs
Mike McCliman Assistant City Manager City Manager's Office Nathan Hunt CSD Director Community Services
Jennelle Markel Human Services Supervisor Community Services Art Yero GIS Analyst Innovation and TechnologyGIS
Steve Lawdis GIS Supervisor Innovation and TechnologyGIS Michael Parmer Director Engagement and Special
Programs

Page 300 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 8

RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
Name Title Department
Chris Beeman Deputy Director Engagement and Special
Programs (RCMU)
Alberto Felix Traffic Engineer Engineering
Jason Welday Director Engineering
Miguel Sotomayor Principal Engineer Engineering
Jennifer Nakamura Director Planning
Andy Miller Facilities Superintendent Public Works
Danny Akers Deputy Director Public Works
Hank Merenda Park/Landscape Maintenance
Superintendent
Public Works
Maritza Martinez Director Public Works
Richard Favela Streets/Storm Maintenance
Superintendent
Public Works
Mackenzie Rojer Data Analyst Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District
Neda Majidimehr Emergency Management
Specialist
Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District
Nicole Rogers Public Relations Officer Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
Rick Snawder Deputy Fire Administration
Chief
Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District
Riley Davis Emergency Management
Coordinator
Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District
Shane Adams Fire Marshal Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District
Jeff Allison Lieutenant San Bernardino County
Sheriff's Department
Mauricio Hurtado Lieutenant San Bernardino County
Sheriff's Department
Name Title Department
Veronica Fincher Director Animal Care and Services
Chris Lebere Building and Safety Manager Building & Safety Zack Neighbors Director Building & Safety
Jennifer Camacho-Curtis Community Affairs Officer Engagement and Special Programs
Annette Mumolo Community Affairs Senior
Coordinator
Engagement and Special
Programs
Morgan Chavez Community Affairs Coordinator Engagement and Special Programs
Mike McCliman Assistant City Manager City Manager's Office Nathan Hunt CSD Director Community Services

Page 301 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 9

RANCHO CUCAMONGA HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
Name Title Department
Jennelle Markel Human Services Supervisor Community Services Art Yero GIS Analyst Innovation and TechnologyGIS
Steve Lawdis GIS Supervisor Innovation and TechnologyGIS Michael Parmer Director Engagement and Special
Programs
Chris Beeman Deputy Director Engagement and Special
Programs (RCMU)
Alberto Felix Traffic Engineer Engineering
Jason Welday Director Engineering
Miguel Sotomayor Principal Engineer Engineering
Jennifer Nakamura Director Planning
Andy Miller Facilities Superintendent Public Works
In advance of HMPC meetings, consider using Attachment 1 to maintain an accurate list of recent disaster events that have occurred in and around Rancho Cucamonga since the LHMP was adopted. At the meeting, review the Plan Maintenance Table (Attachment 2) to identify any gaps in the LHMP or any other component of the Plan that needs updating. This also allows HMPC members the opportunity to review the actions in the hazard mitigation strategy (Attachment 4) and ensure that they are implemented as intended.

When Rancho Cucamonga Is Updating Its Policy And
Regulatory Documents
For any of these documents that are updated by City Departments, refer to the following guidelines.

The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
All LHMPs should be updated every five years. This helps keep the plan up to date and ensures that it reflects the most recent guidance, requirements, science, and best practices. An updated LHMP also helps keep Rancho Cucamonga eligible for hazard mitigation grants that require a valid, recent LHMP (see “I Want to Apply for Mitigation Grant Funding”), along with an increased amount of post-disaster recovery funds.

The update process for the LHMP takes approximately one year. To ensure that a new LHMP comes into effect before the previous one expires, the update process should begin no later than four years after the plan is adopted. Updates may occur sooner at

Page 302 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 10
the City’s discretion. Potential reasons for updating the LHMP sooner may include a state disaster proclamation or federal disaster declaration that covers part or all of Rancho Cucamonga, or if a disaster leads to a loss of life in Rancho Cucamonga (see the “What to Do When a Disaster Has Been Proclaimed or Declared” section), as discussed in Chapter 6 of the LHMP.

Take the following steps to update the LHMP:

1. Assemble the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
 Convene an HMPC meeting no later than four years after the LHMP is adopted. Invite the regular HMPC members, along with representatives from other organizations that may have a role to play in the update process.  Review the current status of mitigation actions, including if there are any that are not being implemented as planned or are not working as expected.

Determine if there have been any changes in hazard events, regulations, best practices, or other items that should be incorporated into an updated LHMP.  Decide if there is a need for a technical consultant to assist with the LHMP update, and conduct consultant selection activities if needed. If a consultant is desired, the selection process should begin at least six months before the update gets underway.
 Create and implement a community engagement strategy, building off of the strategy prepared for the existing LHMP. Describe in-person and online engagement strategies and materials, including ideas for meetings and workshops, draft community surveys, content for websites and press releases, and other materials that may be useful.

2. Update the Risk and Threat Assessments
 Review and update the risk assessment to reflect the most recent conditions in Rancho Cucamonga. Consider recent hazard events, new science associated with hazards and climate change, new development and land use patterns, and other recent changes on local conditions.  Evaluate the status of all key facilities. Update this list if new facilities have been constructed, or if existing facilities have been decommissioned. Reassess the threat to key facilities.  Review the demographics of community residents and update the threat assessment for vulnerable populations and other community members.  Assess any changes to threats to other community assets, including key services, other facilities, and economic drivers.

Page 303 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 11

3. Update the Mitigation Actions
 Update the existing hazard mitigation actions to reflect actions in progress.

Remove actions that have been completed; or revise them to increase their effectiveness. Revise actions that have been abandoned or delayed so as to make them more feasible; or remove them from the list if they are no longer appropriate for Rancho Cucamonga.
 Develop mitigation actions to improve the status of hazard mitigation activities in Rancho Cucamonga by addressing any issues not covered by the existing LHMP.
 Ensure that the feedback from the community engagement activities are reflected in the new and updated mitigation actions.

4. Review and Adopt the Updated Plan
 Review the other chapters and appendices of the LHMP to reflect any changes made through the update process.
 Release the updated Plan to HMPC members; and revise the Plan to reflect any comments received.
 Distribute the updated Plan to any appropriate external agencies not included in the HMPC; and revise the plan as appropriate in response to any comments.
 Release the updated Plan publicly for review; and make revisions to the Plan to reflect public comments.
 Submit the plan to Cal OES and FEMA for approval, and make any revisions as needed.
 Submit the plan to the Rancho Cucamonga City Council for adoption.

The Safety Element of the General Plan
The Safety Element is a required component of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan. It can be updated as a stand-alone activity, or as part of a more comprehensive process to update multiple sections or all of the General Plan. The Safety Element does not need to be updated on any set schedule, but updates should be frequent enough for the element to remain current and applicable to the community.

Local communities can incorporate their LHMP into their Safety Element as allowed under Section 65302.6 of the California Government Code, as long as the LHMP meets minimum federal guidelines. This allows communities to be eligible for an increased share of post-disaster relief funding from the State if a hazard event occurs, as per Section 8685.9 of the California Government Code.

Page 304 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 12
Take the following steps to incorporate the LHMP into the Safety Element:

Incorporate New Requirements Into the Safety Element, Ensuring That the Safety Element Is Consistent with the LHMP
 Review the requirements for Safety Elements in Section 65302(g) of the California Government Code, and for LHMPs in Section 65302.6 of the California Government Code. Ensure that both documents meet all state requirements.
 Ensure that the information in both plans do not contradict each other, and that any inconsistencies are corrected to use the most accurate and appropriate information. This information should include community descriptions, a risk assessment, and a threat assessment.  Ensure that the policies in the Safety Element support the LHMP and provide a planning framework for specific hazard mitigation actions.

The Housing Element of the General Plan
The Housing Element is a required component of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan.

Section 65583 of the California Government Code requires a Housing Element to analyze and plan for new residential growth in a community, including residential growth for households with an annual income below the area median. Similar to an LHMP, state regulations require that Housing Elements be updated regularly to remain current and valid.

The Housing Element is not required to contain any information or policies that relate to hazards, although it may include policies that address retrofitting homes to improve resiliency. However, state law requires regular updates to the Housing Element and other elements like the Safety Element. For example, Section 65302(g)(6) of the California Government Code requires that communities that update their Housing Element also update the Safety Element to include information that addresses any new requirements since the last update. As the LHMP is incorporated into the Safety Element, updates to the Housing Element may indirectly trigger updates to the LHMP.

To update the LHMP concurrent with updates to the Housing Element, take the following steps:
 Ensure That the Lhmp Meets Any New Requirements for the Safety Element That May Be Triggered by a Housing Element Update
 Section 65302(g) of the California Government Code lists a number of requirements for the Safety Element of the General Plan. Some of these requirements are triggered by updates to the Housing Element. Check to see if there are any new requirements of this nature. Note that the requirement is linked to the date of adoption of the new Housing Element, not the date the update process begins.

Page 305 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 13
 Because the LHMP is incorporated into the Safety Element, any amendments or revisions to the Safety Element triggered by the Housing Element update may be made directly in the LHMP. Requirements triggered by the Housing Element are unlikely to require a full rewrite of the LHMP, but the process should fully involve the HMPC and include appropriate community engagement.
 Adopt the updated LHMP and incorporate it into the Safety Element. If necessary, amend the Safety Element to ensure the two documents are consistent (review the “Incorporate New Requirements Into the Safety Element, and Ensure that the LHMP is Consistent with the Safety Element” subsection above).

The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code
Rancho Cucamonga’s Municipal Code contains a set of standards that guide land uses and development in the community. These standards include where different types of buildings and land use activities may be located, how these structures must be built, and how they must be operated or maintained. The Municipal Code may include requirements that structures (particularly new structures or those undergoing substantial renovations) incorporate hazard-resistant features, be located outside of the most hazard-prone areas or take other steps to reduce hazard vulnerability.

All communities in California are required to adopt the minimum state Building Standard Code (BSC), which includes some hazard mitigation requirements for new or significantly renovated structures. The BSC is generally updated every three years, with supplemental code updates halfway into each update cycle. Title 15 of Rancho Cucamonga’s Municipal Code contains building regulations and incorporates the BSC.

Other sections of the Code adopt additional standards as desired by the City that adapt the BSC to Rancho Cucamonga’s local context.

As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Rancho Cucamonga is required to incorporate Floodplain Management Requirements in its Zoning Code, which is located in Chapter 19.12. These regulations establish standards for development and operation of facilities within mapped flood-prone areas. Other sections of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code may include additional standards related to hazard mitigation activities.

With the exception of the Floodplain Management Regulations and the minimum standards in the BSC, Rancho Cucamonga is not required to incorporate hazard-related requirements in the Municipal Code. However, the Municipal Code is an effective tool for implementing hazard mitigation measures that relate to the siting, construction, and operation of new buildings and other structures. Substantial updates to the Municipal Code, including the Buildings and Construction and Zoning Code sections, should be done in a way that is consistent with the LHMP.

Page 306 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 14
Include Hazard-Related Requirements in Applicable Sections of the Rancho Cucamonga Code of Ordinances
 If the BSC is being updated, evaluate the hazard-related requirements of all sections in the new BSC. Identify any areas where it may be feasible to add or revise standards to help reduce the threat from hazard events. Ensure that these standards are consistent with the LHMP. Consider whether standards should be applied to all structures, or to specific types of structures or to structures in a limited area (such as a flood plain).
 If the Zoning Code is being updated, ensure that all requirements do not expose community members or community assets to an excessive risk of harm. Where feasible, use the requirements to strengthen community resiliency to hazard events. Ensure that these standards are consistent with the LHMP. Consider possible standards such as overlay zones that strengthen zoning requirements in hazard-prone areas, landscaping and grading requirements that buffer development from hazards, siting and design standards that make structures more resilient, and other strategies as appropriate.

Page 307 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 15
ATTACHMENT 1 ‒

DISASTER INFORMATION TABLE
Use this table to fill out information about any disaster events that have occurred in Rancho Cucamonga or nearby and have had an effect on the community. Include the date and location of the disaster event, the damages associated with the event, and any information about disaster proclamations or declarations resulting from the event.

DISASTER INFORMATION TABLE
Date Location Damages* Declaration Details†
* Includes number and type of injuries, number of deaths, and cost of physical damage † If the disaster was proclaimed or declared by the local, state, and/or federal government

Page 308 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 16
ATTACHMENT 2 ‒

PLAN MAINTENANCE TABLE
Use this table when reviewing the LHMP as part of the HMPC’s annual activities. For each section of the LHMP, note if any changes should be made to make the Plan more effective for the community. This includes noting if anything in the LHMP is incorrect or if any important information is missing. Make revisions that are consistent with these notes as part of the next update to the LHMP.

PLAN MAINTENANCE TABLE
Section
Is Anything
Incorrect?
Is Anything
Missing?
Should Any Other
Changes Be Made?
Multiple sections or
throughout
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Community
Profile
Chapter 3: Risk
Assessment
Chapter 4: Threat
Assessment
Chapter 5: Mitigation
Strategy
Chapter 6: Plan
Maintenance
Appendices
* Includes number and type of injuries, number of deaths, and cost of physical damage † If the disaster was proclaimed or declared by the local, state, and/or federal government

Page 309 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 17
ATTACHMENT 3 ‒

SAMPLE AGENDA AND TOPICS FOR THE

HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING COMMITTEE
This attachment includes a sample agenda and discussion topics for the annual meeting of the HMPC. Meetings do not have to follow this order or structure, but the items included in this attachment should be addressed as part of the annual meeting. During the update process for the LHMP, it is likely that the HMPC will meet more frequently.

HMPC meetings during the update process will involve different discussion topics.

Item 1: Recent Hazard Events

1.1. What hazard events have occurred this past year in Rancho Cucamonga, or nearby in a way that affected the community?
• Identify events that caused loss of life or significant injury to Rancho Cucamonga community members, significant property damage in Rancho Cucamonga, or widespread disruption to Rancho Cucamonga. • More minor events should also be identified if there is a need for a community response to mitigate against future such events.

1.2. What are the basic facts and details behind any such hazard events? • Consider the size and location of the affected area, any measurements of severity, any injuries and deaths, the cost of any damage, the number of people displaced or otherwise impacted, and other relevant summary information.
• Ensure that these facts and details are clearly recorded for future plan updates, including through use of the Disaster Information Table (Attachment 1).

Item 2: Mitigation Action Activities

2.1. What mitigation actions have been fully implemented? Are they working as expected, or do they need to be revised?

2.2. What mitigation actions have started to be implemented since the HMPC last met? Is implementation of these actions proceeding as expected, or are there any barriers or delays? If there are barriers or delays, how can they be removed?

Page 310 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 18

2.3. What mitigation actions are scheduled to begin implementation in the next year? Are there any factors that could delay implementation, or weaken the effectiveness of the actions? How can these factors be addressed?

2.4. What resources are needed to support planned, in-process, or ongoing mitigation actions? Does the City have access to these resources? If not, how can the City obtain access to these resources?
Item 3: Information Sharing

3.1. Is the City communicating with all appropriate local jurisdictions, including neighboring communities, San Bernardino County, and special districts? This should include information on district-specific hazard situations, mitigation actions, and other relevant information.

3.2. Is the City communicating with the appropriate state and federal agencies? Is the City receiving information about new regulations, best practices, and data that relates to hazard mitigation activities?

3.3. Are there opportunities for the City to improve coordination with local, state, and federal jurisdictions and agencies?
Item 4: Budgetary Planning

4.1. What are the financial needs for Rancho Cucamonga to support implementation of planned and in-process mitigation actions, including ongoing items? Is there sufficient funding for all measures in the LHMP that are planned for the next year, including in-process and ongoing items? If sufficient funding is not available, how can the City obtain these funds?

4.2. If it is not feasible for the City to support all planned, in-process, or ongoing mitigation actions, which ones should be prioritized?

4.3. Are there hazard-related activities not included in the LHMP that should be budget for? Can the City obtain the necessary funding for these activities? Item 5: Strategic Planning

5.1. Which grants are available for hazard mitigation activities, and which activities are best positioned to secure funding?

5.2. How should the agencies and other organizations represented on the HMPC coordinate to maximize the chances of receiving funding?

Page 311 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 19

5.3. Are there any scheduled or anticipated updates to other City documents that could relate to hazard mitigation activities? How can the HMPC share information with staff and any technical consultants responsible for these updates, and ensure that the updates will enhance community resiliency?

5.4. What capital projects are scheduled or anticipated? Are these capital projects being designed and built to be resistant to hazard events? Are there opportunities for these projects to support hazard mitigation activities?

5.5. How can HMPC members coordinate efforts with those responsible for capital projects to take advantage of economies of scale that will make hazard mitigation activities easier to implement?

5.6. Has it been four years since the adoption of the LHMP? If so, lay out a timeline for Plan update activities, including additional meetings of the HMPC. Identify if a technical consultant is needed and begin the contracting process if so.

5.7. Are there any other opportunities for HMPC members and the organizations they represent to coordinate efforts?
Item 6: New Business

6.1. Are there any other items related to the HMPC’s mission?

Page 312 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 20
ATTACHMENT 4 ‒

HAZARD MITIGATION STRATEGY

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annual)
N/A
P2 Continue to support the expansion of Red Cross
Agreements with public agencies (City, School
Districts) and private entities (Faith-Based
Organizations, etc.) to ensure that facilities can
act as evacuation sites during major emergencies.

General Fund,
Other Grants
CSD, RCFD $ Ongoing
(AsNeeded)
N/A
P3 Continue working with local businesses and
organizations to conduct regular workplace
emergency preparedness training.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(AsNeeded)
N/A
P4 Expand participation in the Rancho Cucamonga
ReadyRC program for residents and businesses.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Mid-Term N/A
P5 Develop means to evacuate community members
who do not have access to private vehicles or are
otherwise unable to drive.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Short Term N/A
P6 Collaborate with the equestrian community in the
City to ensure effective staging, evacuation, and
sheltering plans for large animals.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
N/A

Page 313 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 21

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4
P7 Continue to ensure effective emergency
notifications through multiple media formats—in at
least English and Spanish—about pending,
imminent, or ongoing emergency events. Ensure
that information is accessible to persons with
disabilities and functional needs.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
N/A
P8 Continue to update and maintain the Rancho
Cucamonga Emergency Operations Plan (last
updated in 2023, next scheduled update is in
2028).

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Mid-Term N/A
P9 Continuously update response procedures for
first-responder departments to effectively address
emerging hazard events.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
N/A
P10 Ensure that the City has an adequate supply of
sandbags for residents and businesses, including
prefilled sandbags for individuals who may not be
able to fill them independently.

General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
N/A
P11 Continue conducting active shooter drills for City
staff by the Police Department and Fire District
tactical teams.

General Fund,
Other Grants
PD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
N/A
P12 Continue supporting community active shooter
preparedness through quarterly Active Shooter
educational workshops.

General Fund,
Other Grants
PD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
N/A
P13 Increase the number of City staff who have
CalOES Safety Assessment Program (SAP)
credentials.

General Fund,
Other Grants
B&S $ Mid-Term N/A
Multiple Hazards

Page 314 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 22

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

1.01 Explore the feasibility of connecting critical
facilities (e.g., the Civic Center, key community
centers, and fire stations) to a microgrid power
supply network.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

CMO, CSD,

PW, B&S,

RCFD, ENG,
RCMU
$$ Long-Term Medium

1.02 Upgrade or install energy-efficient fixtures,
appliances, and/or equipment within Critical
Facilities to extend the fuel supply for backup
generators.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

PW, RCMU,

CMO, B&S
$$$ Long-Term Low

1.03 Repair, as feasible, all major deficiencies
identified during inspections to prevent collapse,
failure, or damage to key infrastructure in the
event of a natural disaster.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

PW, B&S, CMO,
ENG
$$$ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
High

1.04 Conduct a feasibility assessment for the
installation of alternative energy (solar, fuel cell,
battery backup, etc.) at key critical facilities within the City. Ensure current and future facilities can
be used as shelters and cooling centers.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

CMO, PW, B&S,
ENG
$ Mid-Term Low

1.05 Work closely with community groups to increase
awareness of hazard events and resiliency
opportunities among socially vulnerable
community members. (Partnership with Healthy
RC and Ready RC)(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

CMO, PW, B&S,
ENG
$ Ongoing
(Annually)
High

Page 315 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 23

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

1.06 Avoid building new City-owned key facilities in
mapped hazard areas. If no feasible sites outside
of mapped areas exist, ensure that such facilities
are hardened against hazards beyond any
minimum building requirements/mitigation
standards.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, ENG $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

1.07 Coordinate with regional social service agencies
and nonprofit care providers to obtain temporary
shelter for homeless persons in advance of
potential hazard events.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
CMO $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

1.08 Coordinate with Caltrans to monitor bridges within the City and develop recommendations for
upgrade/retrofit when deemed necessary.

Prioritize upgrades/retrofits on key evacuation
routes.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium

1.09 Closely monitor changes in the boundaries of
mapped hazard areas resulting from land-use
changes, new or updated information, changes to
state or federal hazard maps, or climate change,
and adopt new mitigation actions or revise
existing ones to ensure continued resiliency.
(Hazards addressed: All)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, GIS $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

1.10 Install and harden an emergency powergeneration system at Central Park that the City can use as an evacuation site.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

PW, ENG,

RCFD, B&S,
CSD
$$$ Short Term High

Page 316 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 24

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

1.11 Develop a Climate Resiliency Strategy that
enhances existing efforts within the City and
analyzes changing climatic conditions that may
impact public health, natural resources, the built
environment, and socioeconomic vulnerability.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
CMO $$ Mid-Term Low

1.12 (New)
Develop a Point of Distribution Plan that supports
ongoing operations during severe weather
incidents and improves coordination during larger
incidents (wildfire, earthquake, power failure)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

CMO, CSD,

PW, B&S,

RCFD, ENG,
RCMU
$$ Short-Term Medium
Seismic Hazards

2.01 Monitor and track development applications
proposing seismic improvements and ancillary
measures to accommodate changes to the
structure's original use.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
B&S $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

2.02 Expand education and outreach by community
groups and industry representatives to residents
and businesses to obtain earthquake insurance.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, B&S $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

2.03 Retrofit critical facilities with seismically rated window film treatments to prevent glass windows
from shattering and install tie-downs and straps
for fixtures inside buildings.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PW $$$ 2030
Mid-Term
Medium

2.04 Collaborate with CVWD to monitor groundwater
elevations for potential liquefaction areas to
ensure shallow groundwater conditions do not
increase seismic vulnerability.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium
Wildfire

Page 317 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 25

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

3.01 Promote the proper maintenance and separation
of power lines.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium

3.02 Promote the efficient response to fallen power
lines.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

3.03 Coordinate with private entities to reduce highly
flammable vegetation in the developed portions of
the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area (WUIFA)
and replant with fire-resistant species.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
High

3.04 Work with property owners to manage dead
vegetation within flood-control facility footprints,
railroad rights-of-way, parks, and open spaces,
especially during and after drought episodes.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, PW $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium

3.05 Continue fire-hazard prevention awareness
campaigns for residents in the WUIFA and
surrounding areas.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium

3.06 Require all new development in the WUIFA and
surrounding areas to use building materials and
methods approved by the CA Building Standards
Commission and establish zones of defensible
space around structures in these areas.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, B&S $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

3.07 Update Chapter 17.80, Tree Preservation, of the
Municipal Code to allow the removal and
modification of eucalyptus windrows in the WUIFA
or in areas with heightened wildfire susceptibility.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, RCFD $ Mid-Term Low

Page 318 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 26

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

3.08 Work with partners to better manage safe and
equitable access to the National Forest via routes
through Cucamonga Canyon and the Etiwanda
Preserve, while ensuring fire safety in surrounding
areas.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, PLAN $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

3.09 (New)
Implement and manage a wildfire camera network
in the northern foothills to provide first responders
and residents with critical early warnings,
accelerating response times and evacuations. (2
phases completed in 2026, remaining to be
completed)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $$$$ 2029
Mid-Term
High

3.10 (New)
To reduce wildfire response times and enhance
suppression capabilities, the Fire District shall
establish and maintain permanent, high-capacity
water sources for helicopters (e.g., aerial dip
sites) at identified strategic locations along the
Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI).

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $$ 2027
Short Term
High
Flood

4.01 Investigate the use of permeable paved and
landscaped swales for new construction and
replacement of City-owned hardscape areas.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP/FMA
Grants, Other
Grants

PW, PLAN,
ENG
$ Long Term Low

4.02 Update the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan
periodically (in conjunction with the LHMP and
CIP) to incorporate new data and/or address
emerging issues.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP/FMA
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG $$ 2027
Short Term
High

Page 319 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 27

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

4.03 Analyze whether new critical facilities can be built at least 1 foot above the anticipated 500-year
flood elevation to determine where this is feasible.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP/FMA
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG $$ Long Term Low

4.04 Coordinate with dam owners/operators, state, and
federal agencies to collectively identify threats to
the City and the region and identify ways to
retrofit/strengthen the dams under their control.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP/FMA
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, ENG $ Ongoing
(Annually)
Medium

4.05 Identify potential flood improvements that also
reduce the threat to dam failure and/or inundation.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP/FMA
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium
Severe Weather

5.01 Update Chapter 17.56 of the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Code to reflect the latest advances in
best practices in landscape design that reduce
water use within the City while also addressing
wildfire susceptibility.
(Hazards addressed: Drought)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, RCFD $ Mid-Term Medium

5.02 Develop a campaign to encourage water/energy
efficiency and reduce consumption in existing
development, and to promote the expansion of
electric-vehicle-ready construction in new
development.(Hazards addressed: Drought,
Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
CMO, B&S $ 2027
Short Term
Medium

Page 320 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 28

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

5.03 Use drought-tolerant plants when installing new or retrofitting City-owned landscapes. Limit turf that
is not drought-tolerant to recreational fields and
lawns, and only when no feasible drought-tolerant
alternatives exist.
(Hazards addressed: Drought)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PW $$ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

5.04 Implement an Urban Forest Master Plan to
diversify tree ages, increase resilience to drought
and warmer temperatures, and expand shaded
areas in the City to reduce the urban heat island
effect.
(Hazards addressed: Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PW, PLAN $$ Mid-Term High

5.05 Create a Cooling Center Plan to use designated
public facilities (libraries, community centers, etc.)
as cooling centers for vulnerable populations
during extreme weather events.
(Hazards addressed: Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, CSD $ Short Term
2028
High

5.06 Promote passive cooling design (brise-soleil, long roof overhangs, locating windows away from
southern facades, etc.) in new developments
during the design review process.
(Hazards addressed: Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
B&S, PLAN $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
High

5.07 Evaluate the equitable access and long-term
capacity of designated cooling centers and
shelters in the City to provide sufficient relief from
extreme heat. Assess the need to expand
services as the frequency, duration, and severity
of future heat waves may change due to climate
change.
(Hazards addressed: Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants

CMO, RCFD,
CSD
$ Mid-Term Medium

Page 321 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 29

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

5.08 Conduct outreach to residents and businesses
prior to the severe winds (Santa Ana Wind
events) on proper tree maintenance and
identification of potentially hazardous trees.
(Hazards addressed: Severe Wind)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD, CMO $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

5.09 Increase the use and construction of shade
structures within new developments, City facilities,
parks, and trails to reduce urban heat island
impacts.
(Hazards addressed: Extreme Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, All
Departments
$$ - $$$ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low

5.10 Expand access to alternative energy
technologies, energy-efficiency improvements,
and appliances, and to programs for vulnerable
populations, to reduce energy consumption and
the need for City services during extreme heat
conditions.
(Hazards addressed: Energy-Shortage, Extreme
Heat)
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
CMO, B&S $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium
Human-Caused Hazards

6.01 Coordinate with the San Bernardino County
Sheriff to monitor potential incidents resulting in
terrorism and mass casualty incidents.
(Hazards addressed: Terrorism/Mass Casualty
Incidents)
General Fund,
Other Grants
PD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
High

Page 322 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 30

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

6.02 Disseminate information on cyber threats or
potential terrorist activity to City staff and
continually follow up with information on further
developments on the situation.
(Hazards addressed: Terrorism/Mass Casualty
Incidents, Cyber Threats)
General Fund,
Other Grants
DoIT, PD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

6.03 Regularly update cybersecurity software and
educate business owners and residents on
current internet-based threats.
(Hazards addressed: Cyber Threats)
General Fund,
Other Grants
DoIT, PD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium

6.04 Evaluate all critical facilities, City administration buildings, and other buildings the City may deem
important in the future for counterterrorism design
elements and building materials.(Hazards
addressed: Terrorism/Mass Casualty Incidents)
General Fund,
Other Grants
PD, All
Departments
$$ Mid-Term High

6.05 Coordinate and enhance datasets for schools,
hospitals, and other critical facilities with the
School District, Hospitals, and other key entities
within the City to better respond to mass-casualty
and terrorism incidents.
(Hazards addressed: Terrorism/Mass Casualty
Incidents)
General Fund,
Other Grants
PD, RCFD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium
Hazardous Materials Release

7.01 Discourage new sensitive land uses, including
schools, parks, childcare centers, adult and senior
assisted living facilities, and community centers,
from locating near identified hazardous material
facilities. Discourage or prohibit new hazardous
material facilities from locating near sensitive land
uses.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
PLAN, B&S $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
High

Page 323 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 31

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4

7.02 Continuously inspect businesses and other
properties that store hazardous materials and
create an inventory of storage locations requiring
updates, maintenance, or renovation.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(Annually)
High

7.03 Coordinate regularly with hazardous materials
generators/operators (So Cal Gas, Edison, etc.) to
understand operational changes within the City.

General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
ENG, RCFD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Medium
Aircraft Incident

8.01 Coordinate with the Federal Aviation
Administration on flight paths over the City and
potential changes that may increase vulnerability
to aircraft incidents. (Hazards addressed: Aircraft
Incidents)
General Fund,
Other Grants
RCFD $ Ongoing
(As
Needed)
Low
Power Failure / Energy Shortage

9.01 (New)
Identify new energy sources and demand
management strategies to offset potential energy
shortages in the future
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCMU $ Mid-Term Medium

9.02 (New)
Retrofit critical facilities to incorporate alternative energy sources and backup power supplies to
increase resilience from power outages
General Fund,

BRIC/HMGP
Grants, Other
Grants
RCMU $$$$ Long Term Medium

Page 324 ends

LHMP Implementation Handbook 32

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MITIGATION ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2026 ID Mitigation Action Item
Potential Funding
Sources1
Responsible
Departments2
Relative
Cost3
Time
Frame Priority4
1 Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) | Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) | Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) 2 Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD) | Community Services (CSD) | Building and Safety (B&S) | Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) | City Manager's Office (CMO) | Police Department (PD) | Planning (PLAN) | Engineering (ENG) | Public Works (PW) | Geographic Information Systems (GIS) | Department of Information Technology (DoIT) | Bold text denotes primary responsible department. 3 Relative Cost Categories: $ Less than $100,000 | $$ $100,001 to $499,999 | $$$ $500,000 to $999,999 | $$$$ Greater than $1,000,000 4 Priority: All medium and high-priority actions anticipated for completion within the next five years should work with Engineering and incorporate into the Major Projects Capital Program.

Page 325 ends

Resolution No.2026-XX - Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMAONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE 2026

LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE, IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) REQUIREMENTS AND
RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2021-090
WHEREAS, the preservation of life and property is an inherent responsibility of local, state, and federal governments; and
WHEREAS, the City is charged and entrusted with the protection of persons and property prior to, during and after emergencies; and
WHEREAS, the goal of a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is to minimize, reduce, or eliminate loss of life and/or property; and
WHEREAS, this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan represents a comprehensive description of the City’s commitment to reducing, preventing or eliminating potential impacts of disasters caused by natural and human-caused hazards; and
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga previously adopted it’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan with the adoption of Resolution No. 2021-090; and WHEREAS, the City desires to rescind Resolution No. 2021-090 and adopt the 2026 updated Hazard Mitigation Plan in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000; and WHEREAS, the City has undertaken a comprehensive and inclusive planning effort in developing the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by organizing resources, assessing risks, and developing and implementing a mitigation plan and monitoring process; and WHEREAS, the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is a Federal requirement under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 for the City to be eligible to apply for Hazard Mitigation Grant funds; and WHEREAS, the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan establishes a coordinated effort to support mitigation activities and identifies measures to combat natural and human caused hazards within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is an extension of the State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and will be reviewed and exercised periodically and revised as necessary to meet changing conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City agrees to adopt this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and urges all officials, employees, public and private organizations, and citizens, individually and collectively, to do their share in furthering the goals and objectives of hazard mitigation within the City of Rancho Cucamonga.

WHEREAS, in accordance with California Government Code Section 65302.6 a community may adopt an LHMP into its safety element if the LHMP meets applicable state ATTACHMENT 2

Page 326 ends

Resolution No.2026-XX - Page 2 of 2
requirements. This adoption allows communities to use the LHMP to satisfy state requirements for safety elements. This adoption provides compliance with AB 2140 requirements.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Resolution No. 2021-090 is hereby rescinded.

Section 2. The City Council approves the 2026 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update.

Section 3. The City Council authorizes the Director of Emergency Services to make necessary administrative and operational changes to the plan that are in keeping with the intent of the plan as approved.

Section 4. The City Council authorizes the Director of Emergency Services, or her duly appointed representative, to perform all duties as required to carry out the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of __________ 2026.

Page 327 ends

DATE: October 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Elisa C. Cox, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Julie A. Sowles, Deputy City Manager
Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Rick Flinchum, Deputy Director of Finance
Kelly Guerra, Special Districts Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve and Adopt Resolutions Certifying the Results of Elections and Adding Annexation Nos. 2026-8, 2026-9, 2026-10, 2026-11, 2026-13 and 2026-14 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2026-095 to 2026-100) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve and adopt the Resolutions Certifying the Results of Elections and Adding Annexations Nos. 2026-8, 2026-9, 2026-10, 2026-11, 2026-13, and 2026- 14 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01.

BACKGROUND:

On June 1, 2022, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) authorizing the future annexation of territory to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) (the “CFD 2022-01”) to provide maintenance and services to streetlights, traffic signals, and appurtenant facilities for new development.

The City conditions property owners to annex such properties into the existing CFD 2022-01 to fund streetlight service and maintenance. In August 2026, the Property Owners signed an Annexation Proceeding Deposit Agreement to initiate the annexation process.

ANALYSIS:

In September 2026, the Property Owners submitted their Consent and Waivers and their Official Ballots, one for each annexation, to the City Clerk’s Office Election Official. The Election Official has canvassed the ballots and completed the statement of votes cast (See Exhibit “A” of their respective Resolution). The Property Owners cast their vote unanimously in favor of the special tax levy for CFD 2022-01.

Adoption of the Resolutions constitutes the City Council’s formal action certifying the election results and adding the Annexation Territories to CFD 2022-01 and directs the recording of an amendment to the existing Notice of Special Tax Lien. By recording this amendment, prospective purchasers of the property within the Annexation Territories will have notice of the special tax obligation affecting such properties.

A map showing the property is included in their respective Resolutions.

Page 328 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

FISCAL IMPACT:

CFD 2022-01 was formed to be financially self-sufficient, meaning the revenues generated by the District offset the costs of providing services and can be adjusted annually based on changes in the overall operating costs of streetlights.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s core values of a relentless pursuit of improvement, promoting a safe and healthy community, and ensuring a sustainable future.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-8 Attachment 2 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-9 Attachment 3 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-10 Attachment 4 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-11 Attachment 5 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-13 Attachment 6 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-14

Page 329 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-8.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-8 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 330 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-8 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

A. The unanimous consent as described in the recitals hereto to the annexation of the Territory to CFD No. 2022-01 has been given by the owner of the Territory and such consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.

B. Less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the each of the parcels located within the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector for the Territory shall be the "landowner" of the Territory as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f).

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 3. Territory. The boundaries and parcels of property within the Territory and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of authorized municipal maintenance services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby approved by this legislative body.

Section 4. Declaration of Annexation. This legislative body does hereby determine and declare that the Territory, and each parcel therein, is now added to and becomes a part of CFD No. 2022-01. The City Council, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-01, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax within the Territory.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 331 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 3 of 3
A. A copy of the Annexation Map as approved shall be filed in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 332 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 333 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 334 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-9
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-9 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 335 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-9 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 336 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 337 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 338 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 339 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-10
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-10 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 340 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-10 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 341 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 342 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 343 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 344 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-11
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-11 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 345 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-11 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 346 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 347 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 348 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 349 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 5
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-13
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-13 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 350 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-13 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 351 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 352 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 353 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 354 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 6
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2026-14
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-14 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 355 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-14 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 356 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 357 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 358 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 359 ends

DATE: October 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Elisa C. Cox, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Julie A. Sowles, Deputy City Manager
Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Rick Flinchum, Deputy Director of Finance
Kelly Guerra, Special Districts Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve and Adopt Resolutions Certifying the Results of Elections and Adding Annexation Nos. 2026-3, and 2026-4 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (RESOLUTION NOS. 2026-101 AND 2026-102) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve and adopt the Resolutions Certifying the Results of Elections and Adding Annexation Nos. 2026-3, and 2026-4 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-02.

BACKGROUND:

On June 1, 2022, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2022-064 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) authorizing the future annexation of territory to Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) (the “CFD 2022-02”) to provide maintenance and services to landscape, storm drains, streets and roadways and police safety calls and services throughout industrial areas.

The City conditions property owners to annex such properties into the existing CFD 2022-02 to fund industrial maintenance and services attributed to the new industrial projects. In August 2026, the Property Owners signed an Annexation Proceeding Deposit Agreement to initiate the annexation process.

ANALYSIS:

In September 2026, the Property Owners submitted their Consent and Waivers and their Official Ballot, one for each annexation, to the City Clerk’s Office Election Official. The Election Official has canvassed the ballots and completed the statement of votes cast (See Exhibit “A” of the Resolution). The Property Owners cast their vote unanimously in favor of the special tax levy for CFD 2022-02.

Adoption of the Resolutions constitutes the City Council’s formal action certifying the election results and adding the Annexation Territories to CFD 2022-02 and directs the recordation of an amendment to the existing Notice of Special Tax Lien. By recording this amendment, prospective purchasers of the property within the Annexation Territories will have notice of the special tax obligation affecting such properties.

Page 360 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

A map showing the property is included in their respective Resolution.

FISCAL IMPACT:

CFD 2022-02 was formed to be financially self-sufficient, meaning the revenues generated by the District offset the costs of providing services and can be adjusted annually based on changes in the overall operating costs of industrial maintenance and services.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s core value of a relentless pursuit of improvement, promoting a safe and healthy community, and ensuring a sustainable future.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-3 Attachment 2 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2026-4

Page 361 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-02
(INDUSTRIAL AREA SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION 2026-3
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-02”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-064 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-02, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-02 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-3 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 362 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-3 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

A. The unanimous consent as described in the recitals hereto to the annexation of the Territory to CFD No. 2022-02 has been given by the owner of the Territory and such consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-02.

Section 4. Declaration of Annexation. This legislative body does hereby determine and declare that the Territory, and each parcel therein, is now added to and becomes a part of CFD No. 2022-02. The City Council, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-02, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax within the Territory.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

A. A copy of the Annexation Map as approved shall be filed in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

Page 363 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 3 of 3
B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 364 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 365 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 366 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-02
(INDUSTRIAL AREA SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION 2026-4
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-02”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-064 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-02, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-02 (Industrial Area Services) (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-02 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2026-4 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 367 ends

Resolution 2026-XXX Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2026-4 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-02, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-02.

Section 4. Declaration of Annexation. This legislative body does hereby determine and declare that the Territory, and each parcel therein, is now added to and becomes a part of CFD No. 2022-02. The City Council, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-02, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax within the Territory.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

A. A copy of the Annexation Map as approved shall be filed in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

Page 368 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2026.

Page 369 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 370 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 371 ends

DATE: October 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM: Elisa C. Cox, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Mike McCliman, Assistant City Manager / Fire Chief Matt Marquez, Economic Development Director
Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
SUBJECT: Letter of Intent Between Hamilton Asset Management, LCC and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District for the District’s Acquisition of Property Commonly Known as 8889 Archibald Avenue; Authorization for the City Manager to Execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement and Leaseback Agreement Consistent with the Terms of the Letter of Intent; and Approve an Appropriation in the Amount of $7,833,150. (CITY/FIRE) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council / Fire Board:

1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement and a Leaseback Agreement between Hamilton Asset Management, LCC and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District for Property Commonly Known as 8889 Archibald Avenue, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 0209-062-01, consistent with the terms of the attached Letter of Intent dated executed by the City Manager on September 28, 2026. If authorized by the City Council/Fire Board, the City Manager and City Attorney will promptly begin preparing and negotiating the final terms of the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Leaseback Agreement;

2. Approve an appropriation in the amount of $6,033,150 to the Fire Capital Reserve Fund (F288) and $1,800,000 to the City Capital Reserve Fund (F025).

BACKGROUND:

A serious fire or life-threatening emergency can and does occur at any place, any time throughout the community. While statistics may indicate more frequent demands in certain parts of the community, it is the goal that all areas of the community have resources that maintain good response times and provide back-up when the first-due units are committed to another incident.

These resources, along with skilled staffing, can most likely stop the escalation of an emergency for any specified risk type.

The process of determining the placement and number of fire stations and apparatus to meet response time goals and standards has evolved over the years. In the 1970s, the process was greatly influenced by the Insurance Services Office (ISO) standard that used one-and-a-half-mile

Page 372 ends

Page 2 ends

radius circles to locate fire stations. In the late 1990s, agencies across the country started shifting towards new methodologies to analyze responses and how they relate to resource distribution and station locations. New technologies opened the door to enable more effective analysis using response data.

In the early 2000’s, the Fire District moved away from the ISO standard one-and-a-half-mile methodology and began utilizing heat maps that provide a quantitative method to determine fire station needs and locations. Heat maps are created using GIS software that uses response data to show clusters and concentrations of emergency incidents where fire crews have been dispatched. They are visual maps that show high-activity areas with frequent calls in warm colors like red or orange, while low-activity areas show up in cooler colors like blue or green. Areas with warm colors indicate the potential need for additional concentration of resources (such as a squad unit) or construction of an additional fire station.

In 2005, the Fire District Strategic Plan identified the need for Fire Station 177 in the northwest section of the city, Fire Station 178 in the center of the city, and the relocation of Fire Station 172 to the west. Based on response data and heat maps, the intent of these recommendations was to reduce response times and provide an enhanced level of service to the growing community.

The Fire District began identifying available properties for future fire stations. Locations indicated by heat maps are approximate and subject to land acquisition, or the availability and use of land already owned by the City, District or other government agencies.

Over the past 20 years, the Fire District has purchased multiple properties in anticipation of future fire station needs. These properties have been purchased at various times as they have been placed for sale in the general areas indicated by the heat maps. In several instances, additional properties have been purchased when a more advantageous property that better meets the needs of a fire station became available. For example, property for the relocation of Station 172 was originally purchased in 2009 directly across from the existing station; however, in 2014 a larger property at the corner of Vineyard Avenue and San Bernardino Road became available. This property gave direct access to a major north-south arterial road, and the station was rebuilt on this site in 2021.

In 2020, through the use of response data and heat maps, the Fire District identified that Fire Station 179 would be needed in the future to serve the southwestern portion of the city. The Fire District located a vacant property in the general area indicated by the heat map. On April 15, 2020, the Fire Board approved the purchase of two parcels of unimproved land located at 9763 8 th Street.

As demonstrated below, current heat maps still indicate the need for additional concentration of Fire District resources in the vicinity of Archibald Avenue and 8th Street. The Fire District has focused on resource concentration of high-volume calls and low acuity calls throughout the city.

With construction of Fire Station 178 in the center of the city, the implementation of both Medic Engine 178 and Medic Squad 178 continues to have an impact on the drawdown of other fire resources to remain available for incident responses in the southwest area. The potential implementation of Medic Squad 171 in the near future will continue this impact on drawdown until such time that the Fire District has realized the full need, capacity and funding to move forward with construction of Fire Station 179.

Page 373 ends

Page 3 ends

ANALYSIS:

In March 2026, the Fire District became aware of a new property available in the vicinity of Archibald Avenue and 8th Street. Currently owned by Hamilton Asset Management, LCC, the property is located at 8889 Archibald Avenue, in a location that is more appropriate for a fire station and fire apparatus than the 8th Street property that was previously purchased by the Fire District.

Property Location Details
The Fire District identified the Hamilton property as a desirable site for a future fire station based on several key operational and site characteristics. The property encompasses approximately 49,300 square feet (1.132 acres), compared to approximately 40,837 square feet (0.938 acres) at the alternative 8th Street site, approximately 20.7 percent more usable land. Current fire station siting must accommodate the apparatus bay, dual drive aprons, on-site circulation drive, staff parking sized for shift overlap, emergency generator and fuel storage, and public parking separated from the apparatus movement zone.

The Hamilton property has added value due to its frontage on Archibald Avenue, a major northsouth arterial that will serve as the primary emergency response corridor for the station's service area. Site depth allows the apparatus bays and drive aprons to be oriented so that egress discharges directly onto Archibald Avenue, placing responding units on the primary corridor at the point of departure and eliminating the intervening local-street travel, turning movements, and stopcontrolled intersections that would otherwise precede arterial access. The arterial frontage further permits the apron to be configured for emergency vehicle signal preemption, allowing apparatus to establish a protected movement into traffic at the point of egress rather than merging unprotected from a local street.

Page 374 ends

Page 4 ends

The Hamilton property location eliminates the routing of emergency responses onto a residential street. This prevents recurring conflict exposure at the point in the response where apparatus are accelerating and operating under warning devices, in addition to eliminating concentrated siren and air horn use in a residential setting during all hours. Directing emergency egress to Archibald Avenue confines that activity to a roadway engineered for higher volumes and higher speeds, where lane width, sight distance, and signal control are already designed to accommodate it. The result is a measurable reduction in neighborhood impact and conflict risk without any corresponding reduction in the Fire District's operational capability.

Property Background
The property was purchased by Hamilton Asset Management, LCC in October 2023. In January 2024, the City approved Minor Use Permit DRC2023-00257 (MUP), granting Hamilton Family Brewery (HFB) authorization to operate a microbrewery with an outdoor seating area within the Center 1 (CE1) Zone at 8889 Archibald Avenue. For the first six months of operation, the MUP allowed the facility to open to the public for beer tasting Sunday through Wednesday from 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and Thursday through Saturday from 12:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. Under the conditions of approval, the applicant could request an extension of operating hours to 12:00 a.m.

Sunday through Wednesday after the initial six-month period; however, no formal request was submitted and the extended operating hours were never approved. HFB previously operated on a property located at 9757 7th Street, Suite 802.

HFB’s grand opening at its new location on Archibald Avenue occurred in September 2025.

Leading up to and following the opening, community members in the surrounding neighborhood publicly expressed concerns that the business was becoming a nuisance, citing loud noise, unruly patrons, increased traffic, parking issues, and alleged noncompliance with conditions of approval.

In response, the City undertook several actions to evaluate these concerns, including community meetings, site visits and inspections, noise testing, increased Police patrols, a warrant analysis for STOP‑sign placement, creating a parking district, and coordination with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.

Despite these efforts, community members continued to express concerns stating that HFB’s operations negatively impacted their physical and mental well-being.

Property Purchase
The Fire District entered into negotiations with Hamilton Asset Management for the acquisition of the subject property in May 2026. Both the Fire District and seller completed appraisals and have agreed upon a total purchase price of $7,800,000.

As part of the negotiations, the Fire District and Hamilton Asset Management will enter into a lease agreement at close of escrow whereby HFB will lease back the property for 10 years at a rate of ten dollars ($10) per month plus utilities, maintenance, insurance, taxes, and other operating expenses. Hamilton Asset Management will also be required to complete repairs as necessary to maintain the property in first class condition for future Fire District use.

The lease will include operating terms that limit the uses and hours of operation to daytime hours and on-site staff. HFB may continue brewery and tasting-room operations for up to a 12-month “Wind Down Period” following the closing, but in no case beyond substantial completion of the tenant improvements at 7th Street property, whichever occurs first. During the Wind Down Period, HFB will reduce brewery and tasting-room business hours of operations to 12:00 p.m. to 10:00

Page 375 ends

Page 5 ends

p.m., Monday through Sunday. At 6 months following closing date, should HFB still be operating their tasting room at the Archibald site, the business days of operation shall decrease by one, thereby operating six days per week. Immediately following the Wind Down Period, HFB’s tastingroom operations will be fully relocated to the 7th Street property (or an alternative location if HFB desired). HFB may continue brewery operations, which are limited to acceptance of deliveries, brewing and cleaning activities, staffing, clerical work, commercial sales (but not the sale of alcohol for on-site consumption) and private events for Tenant’s employees (but not the general public). But the property will no longer be used as a public tasting room following the wind down period.

The Fire District’s purchase of the Hamilton property located at 8889 Archibald Avenue will meet the Fire District’s need for a future fire station site in the southwestern portion of the city, while also mitigating significant concern in the surrounding community. The Fire District will fund the purchase of the property and building for $6,000,000, as well as associated closing contingency expenses of $31,150. The City will fund the relocation and logistical expenses for $1,800,000.

If the parties are unable to reach an agreement on the final terms of a Purchase and Sale Agreement and/or Leaseback Agreement or a party requests terms inconsistent with the LOI, then staff will return to the City Council/Fire Board for further direction. Escrow for the property acquisition will not open until such time that the Purchase and Sale Agreement and Leaseback Agreement are executed.

At this time no fire station has been designed and the precise time for the development of the fire station has not been determined. As a result, no development is currently proposed on the subject property other than maintaining the brewing operations (but not tasting room operations). At the time a fire station is developed, if ever, an environmental review of the proposed station will be conducted in accordance with CEQA. The proposed property acquisition will maintain the status quo for the time being and will progressively reduce noise, traffic, light, and other impacts in the community.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total cost of the Purchase and Sale Agreement is $7,833,150, inclusive of the property purchase, relocation expenses, and closing contingency expenses. Appropriations to the following accounts will be necessary for this purchase:

Account No. Funding Source Description Amount
F288 CC501 SC7005
P0117 PID-2246-288 Fire Capital Reserve Fund Capital Outlay – Land $6,033,150 F025 CC001 SC7005
PID-2246-025 City Capital Reserve Fund Capital Outlay – Land $1,800,000 TOTAL: $7,833,150
The Fire District anticipates offsetting the expense of the purchase of 8889 Archibald Avenue by the future sale of the property located at 9763 8th Street since it will no longer be needed for future Fire Station 179.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all, and by providing continuous improvement through the construction of high-quality public improvements.

Page 376 ends

Page 6 ends

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Letter of Intent, 8889 Archibald Avenue

Page 377 ends

112685504v3
Error! Unknown document property name.

LETTER OF INTENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
September 14, 2026
Elisa Cox, City Manager
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
10500 Civic Center Drive
City Hall Lower Level
Ranch Cucamonga, CA 91730
RE: Letter of Intent for a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and Hamilton Asset Management, L.L.C. for the Property located at 8889 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, together with a Lease of the Property Dear Ms. Cox:

This Letter of Intent (“LOI”) summarizes the principal terms on which Hamilton Asset Management L.L.C. (“Seller”) proposes to sell the Property described below to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (“Buyer”), with a concurrent leaseback to the applicable Hamilton entity to be identified in the definitive agreements (“Tenant”). The proposed purchase and sale, leaseback, continued occupancy arrangements, rent, restrictive covenant, and related obligations constitute one integrated economic transaction (collectively, the “Transaction”).

1. Buyer: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.

2. Property: The “Property” consists of the real property commonly known as 8889 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, Assessor Parcel Number 0209-062-01-0-000, together with the improvements and appurtenant rights to be specified in the definitive purchase and sale agreement (“PSA”).

3. Purchase Price: The purchase price for the Property will be Seven Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($7,500,000.00) (the “Purchase Price”), with such amount based upon appraisals prepared by both the Seller and the Buyer. The parties acknowledge that the Purchase Price reflects one component of the Transaction. Buyer will deposit the Purchase Price with the Escrow Holder prior to the Closing. In addition, Buyer will deliver an additional Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) directly to Seller upon the conclusion of the Wind Down Period and relocation of the tasting-room operation, as described in Paragraph 11 below as consideration for the relocation and winding down of the Tasting Room Operations.

4. Deposit: The parties will deliver a copy of their executed PSA and open escrow within five (5) business days after execution of said PSA. Within three (3) business days after the parties execute the PSA and open escrow, Buyer will deposit Three Hundred Ninety Thousand Dollars ($390,000.00) (the “Deposit”) with the Escrow Holder. The Deposit will be released immediately to Seller, applicable to the Purchase Price, nonrefundable except in the event of Seller’s material breach of the PSA or the failure of any of the Buyer Contingencies listed in Paragraph 6.

5. Escrow and Title: The escrow (“Escrow”) shall be at a national title and escrow holder mutually acceptable to Buyer and Seller (respectively, “Title Company” and “Escrow Holder”). Buyer and Seller shall negotiate in good faith to execute a PSA, Grant Deed with Restrictive Covenant (“Grant Deed”) and Lease of the Property as set forth in more detail in Paragraph 11, below, together with such other conveyance documents and other instruments the parties determine are necessary to consummate the Transaction consistent with the terms of this LOI.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 378 ends

-2-
Error! Unknown document property name.

Within three (3) business days after the opening of Escrow, Seller shall provide all due diligence information in its possession to Buyer, to include any environmental reports, any maintenance contracts and records, any warranties on building, disclosure of any property conditions known to Seller, hazardous materials surveys, land surveys, NHD reports, rent roll, any leases, tax payment records, permit records, service and vendor contracts.

Escrow shall close forty-five (45) days after execution of the PSA, provided Buyer waives its contingencies (the “Closing”).

6. Buyer Contingencies: Buyer’s obligation to purchase the Property is subject to Buyer’s performing review and approval in Buyer’s sole and absolute discretion of the following matters:

The condition of title to the Property and the Title Company’s issuance of a title policy in a form acceptable to Buyer.

The physical condition of the Property shall be substantially the same at the Closing as on the date of execution of the PSA, reasonable wear and tear excepted. Buyer shall have approved of the physical condition of the Property, with Seller granting Buyer the right for Buyer to enter the Property and perform Phase I and, if recommended, Phase II environmental assessments.

The condition of the Property which shall be “As is, Where is”.

7. Closing Costs: Seller to pay the cost of an Owner’s Policy of Title Insurance with CLTA coverage.

Buyer may elect to procure, at its sole cost, an ALTA survey and/or extended policy of title insurance. All real property taxes and assessments or bonds against the Property which are liens and unpaid as of the Closing shall be paid by Seller, except that any assessments payable in installments shall be prorated to the date of Closing. Buyer is exempt from property taxes; consequently, Buyer will not take title subject to any property taxes.

8. Buyer; Intended Use: Buyer presently intends to use the Property for a fire station and related public facilities.

9. Restrictive Covenant: A material condition of the sale of the Property is the recordation of a restrictive covenant in the Grant Deed prohibiting the use of the Property by anyone other than a Seller affiliate (“Hamilton Affiliate”) for the sale or manufacture of alcoholic beverages including but not limited to use as a brewery, brewpub, tasting room or taproom, distillery, bar, or restaurant so long as a Hamilton Affiliate is operating within 10 miles of the Property (the “Restrictive Covenant”). The Restrictive Covenant shall run with the land.

10. Leaseback: At Closing, Buyer, as Landlord, and Seller or a Seller affiliate, as Tenant, shall execute a Lease Agreement for the Property for a term of ten years (“Term”). Rent during the Initial Term and the Extended Term shall be Ten Dollars ($10.00) per month. Tenant shall be responsible for all typical triple net expenses such as utilities, maintenance, insurance, repairs (to maintain the property in first class condition), taxes, and other operating expenses, provided, however, that Landlord shall be responsible for all structural maintenance and repairs. Landlord shall have the option to terminate the Lease if the structure is totally or partially destroyed or damaged and restoration cannot be completed within 90 days. Landlord shall assume all responsibility for Condition 20 of the Conditions of Approval for the Minor Use Permit issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga on January 15, 2024.

11. Continued Operations; Tasting-Room Relocation: Seller has two primary business operations located at the Property – brewing and distributing beer (“Brewery Operations”) and the sale of

Page 379 ends

-3-
Error! Unknown document property name.
alcohol for on-site consumption (“Tasting Room Operations”). Brewery Operations shall mean and include acceptance of deliveries, brewing and cleaning activities, staffing, clerical work, commercial sales (but not the sale of alcohol for on-site consumption) and private events for Tenant’s employees (but not the general public). Any Brewery Operations occurring between 8 PM and 8 AM shall be wholly contained within the building. Tasting Room Operations shall mean and include selling alcohol to the general public for on-site consumption. An integral component of this LOI and the subsequent PSA is the cessation of Tasting Room Operations at the Property.

Tenant will relocate all Tasting Room Operations to 9757 Seventh Street, Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “Relocation Property”) at the earlier of 12 months following the Closing or receipt of all permits to operate Tasting Room Operations at the Relocation Property, whichever occurs first (the “Wind Down Period”). During the Wind Down Period, Tenant may continue to operate the Tasting Room Operations from 12 PM to 10 PM, Monday through Sunday and Brewery Operations shall continue unabated. Within six months after Closing, Tenant shall reduce the Tasting Room Operations days of business operation from seven days per week to six days per week. Upon verification the Buyer that Seller has ceased all Tasting Room Operations in the Property, on or before the first anniversary of the Closing Date, Buyer shall deliver the sum of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) to Seller in consideration for the cost and expense of relocating the Tasting Room Operations. Tenant acknowledges that the City of Rancho Cucamonga may, as an exercise of its police powers, continue the permit parking district fronting the Property.

12. Buyer Planning Activities: Buyer may conduct planning and preliminary activities for its anticipated fire station development before expiration of the Lease, provided those activities do not materially interfere with Tenant’s operations or access to and use of the Property. The Lease will establish reasonable notice, access, safety, restoration, insurance, and indemnity requirements for such activities.

13. Governmental Approvals: The Transaction remains subject to all governmental approvals legally required for Buyer or the Transaction, including approval by Buyer’s governing body. No party will have any obligation to consummate the Transaction unless and until the parties execute and deliver the definitive agreements and obtain all required approvals.

14. Nonbinding Effect: The terms set forth in this proposal are satisfactory to Buyer and Seller; however, the PSA must contain terms and conditions satisfactory to both parties. This proposal represents a non-binding proposal, and no party shall have the right to institute any legal actions with respect to the Transaction. Any understanding between the parties shall only be deemed to have been reached when the PSA containing all the applicable terms and conditions relating to the transaction has been executed by both parties and is acceptable to their respective legal counsel.

15. Brokers: There are no brokers contemplated by this transaction. The parties shall indemnify one another from the claims of any Broker by or through a party for a commission.

If any party to this LOI shall institute any legal action against any other party to this LOI, the prevailing party, whether in court or by way of out-of-court settlement, shall be entitled to recover from the nonprevailing party such prevailing party’s attorneys’ fees, court costs, expert witness fees and/or other expenses relating to such controversy, including attorney’s fees, court costs and/or other expenses on appeal, if any.

Seller and Buyer acknowledge that this LOI is not a purchase contract, and that it is intended as the basis for the preparation of the PSA. The PSA shall be subject to Seller’s and Buyer’s approval, and only a fully executed and delivered PSA shall constitute a legally binding purchase contract for the Property.

Page 380 ends

-4-
Error! Unknown document property name.

If the following principal terms are acceptable as the basis for the PSA, then please execute this LOI in the space provided below and deliver it by email to Joshua M. Hamilton at [email protected].

Date: _____________________________ HAMILTON ASSET MANAGEMENT L.L.C. _________________________________
Joshua M. Hamilton, Manager

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE

PROTECTION DISTRICT
______________________________
Elisa Cox, City Manager
9/28/2026

Page 381 ends

Atta
DATE: October 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Elisa C. Cox, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Peter Castro, Deputy City Manager
Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Report on State Housing Mandates and Impacts to Local Control. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend the City Council receive and file the following informational report regarding changes in State housing law, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), the relationship between State law and the City’s General Plan, Development Code, and related plans, and the City’s ongoing implementation of State housing requirements.

BACKGROUND:

Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy requested this report to provide the City Council and community with information regarding current State laws related to housing, how those laws affect local planning and development review, and the City’s ongoing efforts to implement State housing requirements while continuing to plan for the community.

ANALYSIS:

State and Local Roles in Housing
Housing development within the city is shaped by both local planning authority and an increasingly prescriptive framework of State housing laws. At the local level, State law requires the City to adopt a General Plan that establishes the City’s vision and priorities for the next 10 to 20 years and guides future policy implementation (California Government Code Section 65300). The City also adopts Specific Plans, zoning regulations, development standards, design standards, and infrastructure requirements to implement the vision established by the General Plan. These local planning tools establish land use patterns and help shape the character, form, and function of the community while addressing compatibility among different land uses. Rancho Cucamonga’s current General Plan, Plan RC, was adopted in December 2021.

At the State level, the Legislature has enacted a growing body of housing laws in response to the statewide need for additional housing, greater housing affordability, and increased housing opportunities across California. State law recognizes housing availability as a matter of statewide importance and seeks to ensure that local plans, regulations, and development processes provide adequate opportunities for housing production and do not unnecessarily constrain development.

These laws prescribe how cities must plan for, review, and approve certain types of development.

They also establish requirements governing the Housing Element and RHNA, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), density bonuses, housing development review, certain parking and development standards, and eligibility for streamlined or ministerial approval processes.

State housing law does not eliminate the City’s role in planning or prevent the use of zoning

Page 382 ends

Page 2 of 8 ends

regulations and development standards. However, State law increasingly establishes mandatory requirements or limits local discretion in specified areas. Depending on the applicable law and project circumstances, the City may be limited in its ability to deny a housing project, reduce proposed density, impose certain development or parking standards, apply subjective requirements, or require discretionary review. Local planning continues to play an important role, but within a framework increasingly shaped by State requirements.

What Has Changed Since 2017
Since 2017, the State has enacted over 200 housing laws that have collectively changed the framework within which local governments plan for and regulate housing. While the individual laws vary in scope and eligibility, several recurring themes have emerged:
• Increased State oversight and enforcement: State law has increased oversight of local Housing Element compliance and strengthened enforcement of State housing law. • Increased residential development capacity: State law establishes circumstances in which residential development may exceed the density or development capacity that would otherwise be permitted under local zoning regulations.
• Greater reliance on objective standards: Several laws require qualifying housing development to be evaluated using objective standards rather than subjective criteria. • Expanded ministerial and streamlined review: Certain housing developments that historically could have required discretionary review may now qualify for ministerial or streamlined approval.
• Greater procedural requirements and limits on local action: State law increasingly establishes timelines and procedural requirements for reviewing housing applications and limits a local government’s ability to reduce residential development capacity or deny qualifying housing developments.

These changes reflect a broader shift toward State-established standards and processes for certain types of housing development. The following table summarizes several major legislative actions that illustrate this change.

Table 1 – Major Legislative Actions
Legislation Provisions
Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), as
amended by Senate Bill 423
(SB 423) (Government Code
Section 65913)
Establishing a streamlined ministerial approval process for qualifying multi-family housing developments in jurisdictions that have not made specified progress towards their RHNA.

Qualifying projects are reviewed against objective standards rather than through the discretionary entitlement process.

Housing Accountability Act
(HAA) (Government Code
Section 65889.5)
Limiting a local agency’s ability to deny or reduce the density of qualifying housing developments that comply with applicable objective standards and establish procedural requirements for identifying inconsistencies with those standards.

Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) –
Housing Crisis Act of 2019
Establishing additional protections and procedures for housing development applications, including the preliminary application process, restrictions on reducing residential development capacity, limitations on certain standards and public hearings, and protections for projects based on the rules in effect when qualifying preliminary application is submitted.

Page 383 ends

Page 3 of 8 ends

Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU) legislation (Government
Code Sections 66310-66342)
Qualifying ADUs are generally processed ministerially, and State law establishes requirements relating to matters including unit size, setbacks, parking, processing timeframes, and the number and types of units that may be permitted.

Senate Bill 9 (SB 9)
(Government Code Sections
65852.21 and 66411.7)
Establishing ministerial processes for qualifying two-unit residential development and urban lot splits within single-family residential zones. Where statutory eligibility requirements are satisfied, local review is generally limited to objective standards.

Density Bonus Law
(Government Code Section
65915)
Qualifying projects that provide specified affordable housing may receive additional density above the maximum otherwise permitted by local zoning, as well as incentives or concessions, reduced parking requirements, and waivers of development standards that would physically preclude the projects form achieving the density bonus and incentives to which it is entitled.

Assembly Bill 2011 (AB 2011),
Affordable Housing and High
Road Jobs Act — Government
Code Sections 65912.100–
65912.140
Establishes a streamlined ministerial approval process for qualifying multifamily housing on certain commercially zoned sites when specified affordability, site, and objective-standard requirements are met.

Senate Bill 684 (SB 684),
Starter Home Revitalization
Act — Government Code
Sections 65852.28, 65913.4.5,
and 66499.41
Requires ministerial approval of qualifying small-lot multifamily housing projects meeting specified criteria, including projects of 10 or fewer units on qualifying sites.

These laws do not apply to every housing project. Eligibility depends on the specific law, site, zoning, project characteristics, affordability requirements, and other statutory criteria. However, collectively they demonstrate the extent to which State law now establishes requirements that can affect the density, standards, timing, and type of local review applicable to housing development.

Implementation, Interpretation, and Oversight of State Housing Laws State housing laws are often written broadly to address a wide range of communities, housing types, and development circumstances. As these laws are applied to specific projects, questions may arise that were not expressly addressed when the legislation was enacted. The resulting guidance, interpretations, and legal decisions can further define how the law is applied and, in some cases, affect the practical requirements applicable to local governments and housing development.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) plays an important role in interpreting and monitoring the implementation of State housing requirements. Through its Housing Accountability Unit, HCD provides technical assistance, monitors compliance with applicable State housing laws, and may review inquiries or potential violations. For example, any party may request HCD's review of a potential violation by a city in connection with the processing or approval of a housing development. HCD may also initiate a review based on information it receives from stakeholders or other sources, such as Housing Element materials, Annual Progress Reports, news articles or other available information. Depending on the circumstances, HCD may provide technical assistance, request information, identify potential compliance issues, or take enforcement action authorized by State law. This provides an additional level of oversight that can influence how a law is applied to a specific development project.

Page 384 ends

Page 4 of 8 ends

HCD involvement does not necessarily mean that a city’s interpretation is incorrect. Rather, it provides an additional level of State oversight through which questions regarding the application of State housing laws may be raised and addressed. Similarly, disputes regarding the interpretation or application of State housing laws may be resolved through litigation, with courts determining how statutory requirements apply to specific projects and circumstances.

As a result, the practical requirements applicable to a particular housing development can become more defined over time through subsequent legislation, HCD guidance and enforcement actions, and judicial decisions. In some circumstances, these interpretations may affect how a statute is applied even when the underlying statutory language has not changed. This can create additional complexity for local governments when implementing laws that use broad or general terms.

The City must therefore continually monitor changes in State legislation, HCD guidance and enforcement activity, and relevant judicial decisions. At times, the City’s development review process is adjusted as the interpretation and implementation of State housing requirements evolves.

What is Regional Housing Needs Assessment?
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a State-required planning process that establishes the number of housing units each jurisdiction must plan for during an eight-year Housing Element cycle. The RHNA allocation is primarily a planning obligation, not a requirement that a city construct a specified number of housing units. A city must demonstrate through its Housing Element, land use designations, zoning, and available sites that sufficient and realistic development capacity exists to accommodate its RHNA at the required income levels (California Government Code Section 65584).

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determines the total existing and projected housing need for each region. Regional determination considers factors established by State law, including projected household growth, vacancy needs, replacement needs, and existing housing needs. For the Southern California region, HCD provides the regional housing need determination to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

SCAG then develops a methodology to distribute the regional number among the cities and counties within its region. State law establishes objectives that the methodology must meet, and HCD reviews the methodology.

During the sixth RHNA cycle (2021–2029), SCAG received a regional housing needs determination of 1,341,827 housing units, which was distributed among jurisdictions within the SCAG region. Rancho Cucamonga’s sixth-cycle RHNA is 10,525 housing units, distributed among very-low, low, moderate, and above-moderate income categories as summarized in Table

2. In December 2021, the City adopted its sixth-cycle Housing Element, which identifies the sites, zoning capacity, policies, and programs needed to demonstrate how the City can accommodate its RHNA allocation.

Table 2 – RHNA Allocation for Rancho Cucamonga, 2021-2029 Income Level Total Housing Units Allocated Percentage of Units Extremely/Very Low (15%-50% AMI) 3,245 31%
Low (50%-80% AMI) 1,920 18%
Moderate (80%-120% AMI) 2,038 19%

Page 385 ends

Page 5 of 8 ends

Above Moderate 3,322 32%
Total 10,525 100%
AMI – Area Median Income
RHNA does not mean the City must build 10,525 units itself or that every site identified in the Housing Element must be developed. Rather, RHNA obligates the City to maintain adequate land use capacity and remove governmental constraints so that the housing forecasted by the Housing Element has a reasonable opportunity to be developed. At the same time, the State tracks and evaluates jurisdictions' progress toward their RHNA allocations based on actual housing production during the Housing Element planning period. A jurisdiction's lack of progress can have consequences under other State housing laws. For example, SB 35, as amended by SB 423, establishes circumstances in which qualifying housing developments may be eligible for streamlined ministerial approval in jurisdictions that have not made specified progress toward their RHNA allocations. Under California's "no net loss" requirements, if a city approves a development proposal that reduces the housing capacity identified for a site in the Housing Element, that city must identify and make available sufficient capacity elsewhere to replace the lost capacity, thereby maintaining sufficient capacity to accommodate its RHNA allocation throughout the Housing Element planning period.

Relationship Between State Law, the General Plan, Development Code and Specific Plans The City’s General Plan, Housing Element, Specific Plans, and Development Code establish an interconnected framework for planning and regulating development. The General Plan establishes the City’s long-term vision and overall policy framework for growth and development (Government Code Section 65300). The Housing Element is one component of the General Plan and is subject to detailed State statutory requirements and HCD review and approval (Government Code Sections 65302 and 65580). The Development Code implements the General Plan through zoning districts, permitted uses and densities, development standards, procedures, and other regulations applicable to specific zones, uses, and development applications (California Government Code Section 65860). Specific Plans provide more detailed land use policies, development standards, and implementation tools for particular areas (Government Code Sections 65450–65457).

These local planning documents and regulations must remain consistent with applicable State law. As a result, the City’s local regulatory framework establishes the baseline for development in the community, but State law may establish additional requirements or limitations for particular housing projects.

Local zoning requirements continue to apply to many projects. However, for certain projects, State law may require additional density, prohibit or limit certain local requirements, establish different development standards, or require ministerial review rather than discretionary review.

Development review therefore requires consideration of both the applicable local regulations and any State housing laws that may apply to the project.

State Laws Affecting Residential Density
A significant change in State law involves the circumstances under which residential development may exceed the density established by local plans and zoning.

State Density Bonus Law allows qualifying housing developments to exceed the otherwise maximum allowable residential density and may require incentives or concessions, reduced

Page 386 ends

Page 6 of 8 ends

parking requirements, and waivers or reductions of development standards. ADU laws allow qualifying accessory dwelling units on certain sites independent of the density permitted under the underlying General Plan or zoning designation. SB 9 allows qualifying properties in specified single-family residential zones to accommodate additional residential development through twounit development and/or an urban lot split. Other State laws also establish additional residential development opportunities or limitations on local development standards.

As a result, the density established by the General Plan, Development Code, and Specific Plans does not always represent the maximum residential development that may occur on a property.

During development review, the City must therefore evaluate applicable State housing laws in addition to local zoning and development standards.

Discretionary Versus Ministerial Review
State housing legislation has also expanded the circumstances in which qualifying housing development must be reviewed ministerially rather than through a discretionary entitlement process.

Discretionary approval allows the decision-making authority to exercise judgment when evaluating a development project under applicable regulations and standards. Depending on the project and entitlement, discretionary review may involve public hearings, discretionary findings, conditions of approval, and environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Ministerial approval, by contrast, generally requires the City to determine whether a proposed development complies with applicable statutory and objective requirements without exercising discretionary judgment. Where State law requires ministerial approval, the City cannot substitute a discretionary entitlement process or subjective standards for the statutory review process.

Qualifying ministerial projects are generally not subject to CEQA because the approval does not involve the exercise of discretionary authority.

Table 3 – Discretionary Versus Ministerial Review
Discretionary Review Ministerial Review
May involve judgment in applying applicable
approved criteria.

Based on compliance with applicable objective
standards.

May require public hearings and
discretionary findings.

Does not involve discretionary public hearing or
subjective findings for approval.

May require CEQA review unless an
exemption applies. Generally, not subject to CEQA.

Approval may depend on findings required
by the applicable entitlement.

Approval is required when the project satisfies
applicable statutory and objective requirements.

Examples of ministerial or streamlined housing processes include qualifying ADUs and JADUs, eligible SB 9 developments, qualifying small-lot multifamily housing, supportive housing, qualifying projects under the Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process, and certain qualifying projects under AB 2011. The specific review requirements depend on the applicable statute and the characteristics of the proposed development.

Ministerial approval does not eliminate all local zoning regulations. Rather, it limits the City’s ability to impose discretionary review or requirements that conflict with applicable State law. The City

Page 387 ends

Page 7 of 8 ends

continues to apply applicable objective standards and other local requirements to the extent those requirements are consistent with the governing State statute. Maintaining well-defined objective standards allows the City to establish expectations for site design, building form, landscaping, parking, and other development characteristics that reflect community standards while providing the certainty required by State law.

How is Rancho Cucamonga Responding
State housing laws establish requirements that the City must implement while preserving areas in which the City retains authority to plan for and address local community needs. The City is responsible for maintaining a compliant Housing Element, processing housing applications in accordance with applicable State requirements, and administering State housing laws at the local level. Failure to comply with applicable State housing laws may subject the City to state enforcement actions, litigation, court-ordered penalties, and associated legal costs. In some circumstances, noncompliance may also affect eligibility for State funding or further limit local authority over housing-related decisions.

Within the authority that remains, Rancho Cucamonga continues to plan for the character, function, and orderly development of the community through its General Plan, Specific Plans, Development Code, infrastructure investments, and objective development and design standards.

The City evaluates new State housing laws to determine how they should be implemented locally and identifies opportunities to update its plans, regulations, and standards to reflect community priorities while remaining consistent with State law. The City also plans for the roads, utilities, parks, public safety services, community facilities, and other infrastructure necessary to support growth and accommodate new development.

The City also participates in the State legislative process by communicating directly with State legislators and their staff regarding proposed and pending legislation. This engagement provides an opportunity to explain how proposed laws may affect local planning, development review, infrastructure, public services, administrative resources, and the City's ability to respond to local community needs. The City provides technical and local information to help legislators better understand the practical effects of proposed legislation, identifies implementation concerns, and, where appropriate, seeks amendments or clarification to address unintended consequences or preserve appropriate local flexibility.

In addition, the City participates in the League of California Cities (Cal Cities), which represents California's cities and advocates on issues affecting local government. Through Cal Cities, the City can share local experiences and participate in statewide discussions regarding housing policy, local control, and the role of cities in planning and regulating development. Cal Cities also advocates for preserving local government authority and ensuring that State policies recognize the responsibilities, resources, and operational impacts borne by cities.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The implementation of State housing requirements creates ongoing fiscal impacts for the City, including costs associated with increased staff time, consultant and legal services, General Plan and Development Code amendments, housing program implementation, development review, reporting, and ongoing monitoring of compliance. Although the State establishes these requirements, the City generally must absorb the associated administrative and implementation costs within its existing budget.

As a result, the cumulative effect of State housing legislation place additional demands on the

Page 388 ends

Page 8 of 8 ends

City’s General Fund and other local resources without a corresponding, dedicated State revenue source. The City must continually evaluate staffing, consultant services, technology, and other resources necessary to maintain compliance while balancing these costs against existing municipal priorities and available revenues. The fiscal impact extends beyond administrative costs as additional housing development creates demands for infrastructure and municipal services; development impact fees and other revenues may offset a portion of these costs but are generally subject to legal limitations and are not intended to fund the City’s general cost of implementing State housing mandates.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This informational report supports the City Council’s commitment to courageous leadership and service to the community by providing a clear understanding of evolving State housing requirements and their implications for local planning, budgets, and decision-making. The report also describes the City’s ongoing efforts to implement State mandates while advancing the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Housing Law Facts Sheets
Attachment 2 – SPUR Research Paper on California Housing Laws

Page 389 ends

Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) April 2026
1 of 4

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU)
Government Code §§ 66310 – 66342

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory
dwelling units (JADUs) are an important part of
California’s strategy to increase housing options in
existing neighborhoods. In response to the state’s
housing shortage, the Legislature has enacted a series
of laws to reduce barriers and streamline the approval
process for these types of homes. ADUs and JADUs
must generally be approved ministerially in residential and mixed-use zones, with limited ability for
jurisdictions to impose local development standards.

Jurisdictions may adopt an ordinance governing ADUs,
but it must adhere to State ADU Law. Ordinances must
be submitted to HCD within 60 days of being adopted.

HCD may review the ordinance and provide written findings as to whether the ordinance complies with the law. For more information, please see HCD’s Accessory Dwelling Unit page, and learn more from HCD’s ADU Handbook.

KEY PROVISIONS
ADUs
Limitations on Local Development and Design Standards
The ability to impose additional development standards or conditions is limited. For ADUs described in Government Code section 66323, no development standards may be applied other than those described in section 66323 itself. When adopting a local ADU ordinance, a jurisdiction may not do any of the following:
 Impose minimum lot size requirements.
 Impose height limits that are not described in State ADU Law. Height limits vary based on several factors.
 Require rear and side setbacks greater than four feet for new construction ADUs.  Limit the number of bedrooms.
 Require more than one parking space per unit, or require any parking for certain ADUs, such as those within a half mile of public transit, those within historic districts, and ADUs converted from existing space.
 Establish a maximum size of less than 850 square feet, or 1000 square feet if the ADU has more than one bedroom.
 Require replacement parking if the ADU is replacing a garage, carport, or other offstreet parking.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

The fact sheet does not constitute
legal advice but is intended to be a
resource for local agencies and
decision-makers within California,
including members of City
Councils, Boards of Supervisors,
and Planning Commissions.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 390 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) April 2026 2 of 4
 Impose impact fees on ADUs of less than 750 square feet or on JADUs. For larger ADUs, impact fees may be charged but proportionately by comparing the floor area of the ADU and the primary dwelling.
 Limit combinations of ADUs described in Government Code section 66323.

Jurisdictions may subject ADUs to limited development and design standards, but those standards must be objective (e.g., “a detached ADU must be at least four feet from a side or rear property line” rather than “ADUs must be consistent with existing neighborhood character”). To ensure that ADUs and JADUs add to the housing stock, jurisdictions may limit their use as short-term rentals. For certain ADUs and for JADUs, the law requires that any rental be for more than 30 days.

JADUs
A JADU is a unit created entirely within the walls of an existing or proposed singlefamily residence. This includes an attached garage. JADUs are subject to many of the same rules as ADUs, including ministerial approval in residential and mixed-use zones, but there are some differences. For example:
 JADUs may not exceed 500 square feet, and do not increase assessable space.  Only one JADU is allowed per single-family lot.
 A JADU may share a bathroom with the single-family residence.  If a JADU is replacing the garage, the jurisdiction may not require replacement parking.
 In a residence with a JADU that shares a bathroom with the main house, the owner must occupy either the JADU or the primary residence, with some exceptions.

Ministerial Approval
Generally, jurisdictions must approve ADU applications in residential and mixed-use zones ministerially as provided by state statutes. Ministerial review means a project that complies with objective development standards will be approved at a staff level and the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Provisions of a certified Local Coastal Program that conflict with State ADU Law will supersede the requirements of State ADU Law within the coastal zone, except that an application must be approved or denied within 60 days, consistent with Government Code section 66317.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND ORDINANCE REVIEW

LETTERS
City of Irvine,
March 27, 2025
The City cannot impose a deed restriction prohibiting
separate sale of an ADU, and townhomes are eligible for a JADU. Regarding the ADU ordinance, the City must either amend the ordinance to comply with state law or include findings in the ordinance resolution to explain how the ordinance otherwise complies with state law and HCD
findings.

Page 391 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) April 2026 3 of 4
City of Sutter Creek,
March 11, 2025
Among other findings related to discrepancies in
development standards and unpermitted units, the City must comply with State ADU Law on the number of allowable units (e.g., up to eight detached ADUs, not to exceed the number of existing units, in an existing multifamily dwelling or up to two detached ADUs for a proposed multifamily dwelling.

City of Camarillo
March 6, 2025
Among various findings that portions of the City’s ADU
ordinance are noncompliant with State ADU Law, the City must amend the ordinance to provide for all combinations of ADUs under Government Code section 66323.

City of Berkeley,
February 25, 2025
The City must allow both new construction and conversion ADUs on lots with multifamily dwellings, provided the ADUs meet applicable objective standards. It clarifies that
Government Code section 66314(d)(3) requires jurisdictions to permit all qualifying ADU types—not just conversions— and that a local ordinance cannot impose more restrictive limitations than state law.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
ADUs and JADUs in
Disaster Recovery
and the Coastal Zone
AB 462, Lowenthal
(2025); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 66328 &
66329
This bill allows ADUs to be rebuilt before the primary dwelling when certain disaster-related conditions are met. Explicitly applies review deadlines and limits appeals for ADUs and JADUs in the coastal zone.

Technical and
Procedural
Clarifications for
ADUs and JADUs
SB 543, McNerney
(2025); amended,
added, and
renumbered several
sections of State ADU
Law
This bill clarifies that ADU and JADU floor area limits apply to interior livable space, requires application completeness determinations within 15 business days, clarifies when ADUs and JADUs are exempt from school fees and other impact
fees, clarifies the allowable combinations of ADUs and
JADUs, and makes procedures and standards that apply to JADUs more like those that apply to ADUs.

ADU Expansion for
Multifamily Housing
SB 1211, Skinner
(2024); amended Gov.

This bill increases the number of detached ADUs allowed on lots with existing multifamily dwellings from two to up to eight, if the number of ADUs does not exceed the number of
existing units on the lot. It also restricts local agencies from

Page 392 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) April 2026 4 of 4
Code, §§ 66313,
66314 & 66323.
requiring replacement parking when an uncovered parking space is converted to an ADU.

Legalizing
Unpermitted ADUs
and JADUs
AB 2533, Carrillo
(2024); amended Gov.

Code, § 66332
This bill helps legalize unpermitted ADUs and JADUs built before January 1, 2020, while ensuring that structures will not be substandard. It limits fees, allows a third-party code inspection, and requires jurisdictions to inform the public about its provisions.

Page 393 ends

Affordable Housing & High Roads Jobs Act (AB 2011) April 2026 1 of 2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING & HIGH ROADS JOBS ACT (AB 2011)
Government Code §§ 65912.100-65912.140

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of
2022 (Chapter 647, Statutes of 2022), commonly
referred to as “AB 2011,” was signed into law on
September 28, 2022. The statute aims to address
California’s housing shortage by facilitating and
streamlining the approval process for qualifying
multifamily housing developments on commercially
zoned sites. By allowing housing developments in these
locations “by-right,” without discretionary review and
hearings, AB 2011 removes review process barriers and
expedites the construction of much-needed affordable
and mixed-income housing. The law took effect on July
1, 2023, and remains in effect until January 1, 2033
unless otherwise extended.

KEY PROVISIONS
AB 2011 creates an optional streamlined, ministerial review process for housing projects on sites that allow commercial uses (office, retail, and parking). The ministerial process means that eligible projects cannot be denied based on subjective local discretion, are exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act), and must be evaluated solely based on the project’s compliance with the requirements of AB 2011.

The statute also prohibits local governments from imposing additional fees or requirements based on a project’s eligibility for streamlined approval.

The statute contains two pathways:
 One hundred percent affordable lower income developments, and  Mixed-income developments meeting specified affordability levels.

In addition to the affordable housing requirements, a development must comply with an array of other criteria for site eligibility and development-specific requirements (e.g., environmental criteria, replacement housing, limitations for vacant sites, and specified densities, among others). There is some variation in the requirements between the two different project pathways.

Labor Requirements. In exchange for streamlined review, developers must agree to provide the required affordable units and adhere to prevailing wage and labor standards in construction, requiring construction workers to be paid at least the general prevailing wage rate. For projects of 50 units or more, developers must also provide access to apprenticeship programs and healthcare expenditures for workers.

Exempt and Replace. The statute also allows local governments to exempt parcels from AB 2011 eligibility – and replace them with other parcels – if the local government The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 394 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affordable Housing & High Roads Jobs Act (AB 2011) April 2026 2 of 2 provides specific documentation and findings, including demonstrating that there would be no net loss in residential capacity.

Reporting. Local governments are required to report any AB 2011 projects as part of the annual progress reports (APR) due to HCD annually on April 1.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Santa Ana,
December 10, 2024
Parcel exemptions are allowed only if local governments provide written findings demonstrating no net loss in housing capacity, including for lower-income units, and requires replacement sites to meet fair housing (AFFH) standards.

The letter also confirms that exemptions are valid only if formally adopted through an ordinance with sufficient
analysis.

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS
Campus
Development Zone,
Site Criteria
AB 893, Fong (2025);
amended Gov. Code,
§§ 65912.101,
65912.104, 65912.114,
65912.121, 65912.122,
65912.123, and
65912.124, and added
Gov. Code, §
65912.103.5
AB 893 extends AB 2011’s by-right, streamlined, ministerial review process to qualifying student housing developments in “campus development zones” as defined in the statute.

Additionally, AB 893 clarifies that a “site” for the purposes of AB 2011 compliance is only the area of the parcel(s) “being physically disturbed by construction.”
Objective Standards,
Affordability and Site
Criteria
AB 2243, Wicks
(2024); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65852.24,
65912.101, 65912.111,
65912.112, 65912.113,
65912.114, 65912.121,
65912.122, 65912.123,
and 65912.124 and
added Gov. Code, §
65912.106
AB 2243 builds upon AB 2011 by making comprehensive
clarifications and changes. Some of these changes
expanded where streamlined housing development could
occur, for example, to allow mixed-income housing projects on regional mall sites and within proximity of a freeway provided the project incorporates specified building features.

Other changes included clarifications about how AB 2011 works in combination with the State Density Bonus Law and how local inclusionary housing requirements apply to mixedincome developments.

Page 395 ends

Affordable Housing on Faith & Higher Education Lands Act April 2026 1 of 4

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON FAITH & HIGHER EDUCATION LANDS ACT Government Code § 65913.16

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education
Lands Act (Chapter 771, Statutes of 2023), commonly
referred to as “SB 4,” provides for by-right approval of qualifying housing development on land owned by faithbased organizations and independent institutions of higher education. Effective July 2, 2024 through
January 1, 2036, this law establishes a streamlined,
ministerial approval process for 100 percent affordable housing projects on qualified lands, bypassing many
traditional local zoning restrictions with the intent to advance California’s housing goals.

KEY PROVISIONS
Affordability Requirements
One hundred percent of units (excluding managers' units) must be for lower income households, except up to 20 percent may be for moderate-income households and up to 5 percent may house staff of the land-owning institution. Units must be deedrestricted for 55 years (rental) or 45 years (ownership).

Eligibility Criteria
Qualifying SB 4 affordable housing developments are permitted in all zones, including single-family and non-residential zones. To qualify for SB 4, the property must have been owned by a religious institution or independent higher education institution (including through an affiliated nonprofit) as of January 1, 2024.

Projects are eligible for protections under the Housing Accountability Act and qualify for density bonus and other provisions under State Density Bonus Law. However, in some cases, a development cannot use a density bonus incentive, concession, or waiver to increase the height of the development beyond what is allowed as described below under “Density and Height.”
Any requested modifications to a development project approved under SB 4 must be evaluated under the same objective standards as the original application unless the total square footage of construction increases by 15 percent or more or the total number of units decreases by 15 percent or more, in which case the local government may apply objective standards adopted after the original application was submitted.

Parcel Requirements
 Urbanized Area or Urban Cluster. The development site is a legal parcel(s) located in either 1) a city where the city boundaries include some portion of an urbanized area or urban cluster as designated by the United States Census Bureau The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 396 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affordable Housing on Faith & Higher Education Lands Act April 2026 2 of 4 or 2) for unincorporated areas, within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster as designated by the United States Census Bureau.  Urban Uses. At least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels that are developed with urban uses.
 Tenant Protections. If the project requires the demolition of existing housing units or is on a site where housing units have been demolished within the last five years, the project must comply with requirements for replacement of protected units as specified in the Housing Crisis Act.

The development site cannot be located on a parcel or parcels where:
 Environmental Factors. Certain environmental characteristics are present, including farmland, land zoned or designated for agricultural protection, wetlands, very high fire hazard severity zone, hazardous waste, earthquake fault zone, special flood hazard area, regulatory floodway, lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan, habitat for protected species, or lands under a conservation easement.
 Industrial Uses. Certain industrial uses are present or nearby, including:
• Adjacent to a site where more than one-third of the square footage is dedicated to light industrial use;
• Within 1,200 feet of a site permitted for heavy industrial use; • Within 1,600 feet of a site permitted for Title V industrial use; • Within 3,200 feet of an oil or natural gas refinery.
 Tribal Cultural Resources. Vacant sites that contain tribal cultural resources that could be affected by the development and whose effects cannot be mitigated.

Ancillary and Previous Uses
Projects located in a single-family residential zone may include childcare centers and recreational, social, or educational facilities operated by community-based organizations. All other zones may include commercial uses that are permitted without a conditional use permit or planned unit development permit.

The development project can include any previous use that existed and was legally permitted if certain criteria are met (e.g., the project does not increase total nonresidential square footage or total parking and features the same operational conditions).

Density and Height
 Parcels located in a zone that allows residential use. The minimum density varies based on the type of jurisdiction:
• 15 units per acre for an incorporated city within a nonmetropolitan county, • 10 units per acre for an unincorporated area in a nonmetropolitan county, • 20 units per acre for a suburban jurisdiction, and

Page 397 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affordable Housing on Faith & Higher Education Lands Act April 2026 3 of 4 • 30 units per acre in a metropolitan county.

The permitted height is one story above the otherwise-allowed local height limits. If the local government allows for greater density on the parcel, or greater density or height is allowed on an adjoining parcel, the greater density or building height shall apply. A development also qualifies for the provisions of State Density Bonus Law, including incentives, concessions, or waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios.
 Parcels located in a zone that does not allow residential use. The minimum density is 40 dwelling units per acre and the permitted height is one story above the otherwise-allowed local height limits. If the local government allows for greater density or height on the parcel or an adjoining parcel, the greater density or building height shall apply. A development is allowed to use State Density Bonus Law, except that a development shall not use an incentive, concession, or waiver to increase the height of the development above the height authorized in this paragraph.

Parking
One off-street parking space per unit is required, unless a state or local law allows less, except that no parking is required if the project is located within 0.5-mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor or major transit stop or within 1 block of a car share vehicle.

Prevailing Wage and Labor Requirements
The housing development project must abide by prevailing wage requirements (Labor Code sections 1720-1861), including noticing in accordance with Labor Code section 1773.35. For projects containing 50 units or more, contractors and subcontractors must satisfy health care requirements in addition to participating in an apprenticeship program approved by the State of California Division of Apprenticeship Standards or request the dispatch of apprentices from a state-approved apprenticeship program. The developer must provide the local government with a publicly available monthly report to demonstrate compliance.

Ministerial Approval
SB 4 projects must be approved ministerially without discretionary or CEQA review, provided:
 The project meets all requirements in SB 4, including all local objective development standards that are not in conflict with SB 4, and
 The development applicant completes a Phase I environmental assessment (Health and Safety Code section 78090) and, if warranted, a Phase II environmental assessment (Health and Safety Code section 25403).

Subdivisions that are consistent with all objective standards in the local subdivision ordinance are also exempt from CEQA.

Page 398 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affordable Housing on Faith & Higher Education Lands Act April 2026 4 of 4 Local Government Review
 60- or 90-Day Review. If the local government determines the proposed development conflicts with any of the objective standards, it shall provide written documentation and an explanation of the conflicts within 60 days of the development submittal for developments with 150 units or fewer, or within 90 days of the development submittal for developments with more than 150 units. If the local government fails to provide the documentation within the required timeframe, the development shall be deemed to satisfy the required objective planning standards.  Design Review Allowed. Design review is permitted but limited to objective standards and must not in any way inhibit, chill, or preclude the ministerial approval of the development. Any design review must be completed in 90 days for developments containing 150 or fewer housing units, or 180 days for developments containing more than 150 units.
 No Special Fees or Inclusionary Requirements. Cities cannot impose additional fees or requirements, including inclusionary housing requirements, solely based on SB 4 eligibility.
 Subsequent Permit(s). A local government shall consider the application for subsequent permits based on the objective standards that were in effect when the original development application was submitted unless the applicant agrees to a change in objective standards and shall process the permit without unreasonable delay and without imposing additional procedures or requirements solely based on SB 4 approval. Subsequent permits include, and are not limited to, demolition, grading, encroachment, and building permits, and final maps where applicable.

Page 399 ends

Affordable Housing Preservation Law April 2026 1 of 2

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION LAW
Government Code §§ 65863.10, 65863.11, and 65863.13

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
California’s Affordable Housing Preservation
Law (AHPL) safeguards long-term affordability
in housing developments that have rental
restrictions. Administered by HCD, AHPL gives
a right of first refusal to certain potential buyers
that are determined to be a “Qualified Entity”
(QE) by HCD and are willing to maintain the
affordability of the property. AHPL does this by
providing a 270-day offer period that gives QEs
the exclusive opportunity to make an offer to
purchase a property with expiring affordability.

Non-QEs may only submit an offer after the 270-
day period. This law also ensures transparency
and tenant protections before affordability restrictions expire, mortgage prepayment, or subsidies are terminated.

This law is a critical tool for local governments, housing authorities, and qualified affordable housing organizations seeking to prevent displacement and preserve housing for lower-income residents.

For comprehensive guidance, HCD created a Guide to Affordable Housing Preservation Laws. For more information, please see HCD’s Preservation page.

KEY PROVISIONS
Applies to Certain Multifamily Developments
Multifamily rental developments with five or more units that have received government assistance and are subject to rental restrictions are covered by the AHPL, which includes but is not limited to housing supported by:
 HUD programs (e.g., Section 8, Section 202, Section 236)  USDA Sections 514, 515, 538
 LIHTC and tax-exempt bond financing
 HCD and CalHFA loans or grants
 Local redevelopment agency funds, density bonuses, or other land use concessions Property Owner Noticing Requirements
Property owners must provide multiple advance notices to preserve affordability and inform current and prospective tenants and stakeholders of expiring affordability restrictions. These include:

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 400 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affordable Housing Preservation Law April 2026 2 of 2
 A Notice of Opportunity to Submit an
Offer to Purchase (NOSOP) must be sent
to QEs and HCD before or concurrent with
the 12-month notice. This starts a 270-day
offer period prioritizing buyers who commit
to preserving affordability. During this time,
the owner may only consider purchase
offers received from QEs. If the owner
receives a bona fide, market value offer
from a QE in this period, then the owner
must notify HCD within 90 days that they
have received a purchase offer, and
either: 1) accept one of the offers from a QE and execute a purchase agreement, or 2) record a new regulatory agreement with a term of at least 30 years, per Government Code section 65863.13, subdivision (a).
 Three-Year, Twelve-Month, and Six-Month Notices to tenants, public agencies, local housing authorities and HCD before any expiration of affordability restrictions, prepayment of a mortgage, or termination of subsidy. Three-Year notices must be posted on site and delivered by email or first-class mail to public agencies and HCD.

Twelve-Month and Six-Month Notices must be delivered by first-class mail to each affected tenant.
 Owners must provide tenants the Tenant Advisory and Options document, outlining possible rent changes, displacement risks, and available resources. These notices help tenants prepare and connect with legal aid or public entities.  Owners must complete Annual Compliance Certifications with HCD, affirming they are in compliance with AHPL.
 Injunctive relief is available to tenants and public entities in case of noncompliance, including reinstatement of affordability and restitution for rent overcharges.

Attorney’s fees may also be recovered.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Notice of Expiration of
Affordability
Restrictions
AB 2926, Kalra (2024);
amended Gov. Code,
§§ 65863.10, 65863.11,
and 65863.13
AB 2926 strengthens the AHPL by mandating that owners
of assisted housing developments accept bona fide
purchase offers from qualified entities or record a new regulatory agreement to extend affordability restrictions for at least 30 years. Previously, owners could decline such offers, potentially leading to the conversion of affordable units to market rate.

A Qualified Entity (QE) is a
stakeholder certified by HCD as
capable of operating the housing
and related facilities. A QE can be
a tenant association; a local,
regional, or national non-profit or
public agency; or a for-profit
housing developer that has
obtained certification from HCD.

Page 401 ends

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law April 2026 1 of 4

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING

AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION IN LAND USE LAW
Government Code §§ 8899.50, 65583, 65583.2, 65008

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
AFFH means “taking meaningful actions that, taken
together, address significant disparities in housing
needs and in access to opportunity, replacing
segregated living patterns with truly integrated and
balanced living patterns, transforming racially and
ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of
opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance
with civil rights and fair housing laws.” State law
requires that all public agencies, cities and counties
included, administer all of their activities and programs relating to housing and community development in a
manner to AFFH and take no action that is materially
inconsistent with its obligation to AFFH. Please see HCD’s AFFH page for more information, including a guidance memo to help jurisdictions better understand and fulfill their AFFH duty, with particular attention to housing element requirements. The memo also provides an AFFH data viewer to assist jurisdictions in performing the required analysis.

Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law (ALU Law)
The ALU Law prohibits discrimination in local land use policies and practices. It incorporates the protected characteristics listed in the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code section 12900 et seq., while adding additional protections for persons and families of very low, low, moderate, or middle incomes, which include persons and families with incomes lower than 150 percent of area median income (AMI). Protected characteristics include race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, military or veteran status, and genetic information.

Enforced by the California Civil Rights Department, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) also prohibits housing discrimination in local land use policies and practices, and on the basis of these protected characteristics. Visit the California Civil Rights Department’s (CRD) Housing Discrimination page for information about FEHA, including examples of actions that could be discriminatory if based on a person’s protected characteristic.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 402 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law April 2026 2 of 4

KEY PROVISIONS
Housing or Community Development and AFFH
Beyond what federal fair housing laws might require, Government Code section 8899.50 extends the obligation to affirmatively further fair housing to all public agencies in the State of California with programs or activities that relate to housing or community development. This affirmative duty is not limited to those agencies with relationships with the federal government. These statutory obligations charge all public agencies with broadly examining their existing and future policies, plans, programs, rules, practices, and activities, and making proactive changes to promote more inclusive communities.

This can include, for example, considering whether the location and provision of public services and infrastructure are consistent with AFFH.

Housing Elements and AFFH
Government Code sections 65583 and 65583.2 establish several requirements for local housing elements. Jurisdictions must include the following AFFH components:
 A summary of fair housing issues and an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity.
 A comparative analysis of available federal, state, and local data and knowledge to identify integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. This analysis must identify and examine such patterns, trends, areas, disparities, and needs, both within the jurisdiction and comparing the jurisdiction to the region in which it is located, based on protected characteristics.
 An analysis of the relationship of the sites identified in the land inventory to the jurisdiction’s duty to AFFH.
 An assessment of contributing factors for fair housing issues in the jurisdiction, with highest priority given to factors that limit fair housing choice or access to opportunity or that negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance.  Programs to address the most salient fair housing issues and priorities identified by the required AFFH analyses, with measurable outcomes and a concrete timeline with milestones.

Section 65583 also clarifies local jurisdictions’ AFFH duties by specifying that localities must promote, remove constraints on, and otherwise affirmatively support housing for persons with characteristics protected by state fair housing laws, including protections that apply to households with lower incomes.

Land Use Policies and Practices and ALU Law
As specified in Government Code section 65008, the following are key components of the ALU Law:

Page 403 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law April 2026 3 of 4
 Method of Financing, Household Characteristics or Income, Multifamily Use.

The law prohibits discriminating against a housing development or an emergency shelter—including by disapproving it or imposing conditions—because of the method of financing, because of any characteristics of the owners or the intended occupants protected under FEHA, because of the income level of the intended occupants, or because the development is multifamily if it is consistent with the zoning for the site.  Equal Requirements. The law prohibits jurisdictions from imposing requirements on government subsidized or assisted housing or shelters that are different from those imposed on nonsubsidized or unassisted housing. It similarly prohibits jurisdictions from imposing requirements on housing for persons with protected characteristics or with incomes below 150 percent of AMI that are different from the requirements jurisdictions generally impose on housing.
 Preferential Treatment. The law authorizes jurisdictions to extend preferential treatment to publicly subsidized housing or emergency shelters.  Senior Housing. The law allows limited exceptions for senior housing that limit occupancy based on age.

In addition to prohibiting discriminatory local land use policies and practices, the law specifies that any actions taken under such policies or practices are null and void.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Norwalk,
September 16, 2024
The City’s ordinance imposing a citywide moratorium on
establishing, implementing, or operating emergency shelters, single-room occupancy housing, supportive housing and
transitional housing violates ALU Law for two reasons. First, the City is prohibiting housing because of the method of financing and/or the intended occupants. Second, the
moratorium specifically denies low-income individuals and families, including individuals experiencing homelessness and individuals with disabilities, the enjoyment of housing.

City of Fresno,
August 7, 2024
The City’s decision to accept and later reject Homekey
funding for a permanent supportive housing project located near resources and services runs counter to AFFH and the City's proposed housing element commitments.

County of Fresno,
August 5, 2024
Withdrawal of the County’s application for grant and loan funding from HCD’s No Place Like Home (NPLH) program in connection with an approved supportive housing project runs counter to the County’s duty to protect persons or families of very low or low income.

City of Concord,
June 10, 2024
The City’s failure to approve the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) resolution for an affordable

Page 404 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law April 2026 4 of 4
housing project may be inconsistent with several of the City’s housing element programs. Given that the approval of the TEFRA creates no risk, obligation, or liability for the City, the denial of a resolution raises concerns that the denial is “materially inconsistent” with the City’s obligation to AFFH.

County of Los
Angeles,
July 28, 2023
ALU Law prohibits the County from imposing different
requirements on a supportive housing project than those generally imposed on other housing.

City of Anaheim,
December 14, 2021
The City violated California’s AFFH and ALU Law provisions by “imposing separate, more onerous requirements on
housing for a protected class” when it both impermissibly required a conditional use permit and subsequently denied its issuance for the “Grandma’s House of Hope” application, a proposal to create transitional housing for formerly homeless women with mental health disabilities. HCD warned the City of its continued violation of these laws, and later joined a lawsuit filed by Grandma’s House of Hope. In February 2024, the Orange County Superior Court ruled in favor of HCD.

RECENT LEGISLATION
Additional AFFH
Analysis
AB 1304, Santiago
(2021) amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65583 and
65583.2
Pursuant to AB 1304, jurisdictions must include an analysis in their housing element sites inventory of how the inventory affirmatively furthers fair housing and state explicit goals, objectives, and policies relative to AFFH. In addition, jurisdictions must analyze their fair housing issues through both a regional and historical context rather than just analyzing current issues within their own boundaries and must include protected characteristics as factors in the analysis. AB 1304 also clarified that AFFH duties are
mandatory and enforceable in court.

Affirmatively
Furthering Fair
Housing
AB 686, Santiago
(2018) amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65583 and
65583.2, added Gov.

Code, § 8899.50
AB 686 requires all public agencies, including cities and counties, to administer all of their activities and programs relating to housing and community development in a manner to AFFH and take no action that is materially inconsistent with the duty to AFFH. Beginning January 1, 2021, all
housing elements must include an assessment of fair
housing issues, an analysis of the relationship between available sites and areas of high or low resources, and concrete actions in the form of programs to address identified fair housing issues and/or further promote AFFH.

Page 405 ends

By-Right Approval for Low Barrier Navigation Centers April 2026 1 of 2

BY-RIGHT APPROVAL FOR LOW BARRIER NAVIGATION CENTERS
Government Code §§ 65660-65668

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
Low-barrier navigation centers serve as shelters that
follow best practices to reduce barriers to entry—such
as allowing partners and pets, providing storage, and
ensuring privacy—while focusing on transitioning
individuals experiencing homelessness into permanent
housing and support services.

Low-barrier navigation centers must be processed as a
by-right use in mixed-use and nonresidential zones
that allow multi-family residential uses.

KEY PROVISIONS
Project Eligibility
To qualify for by-right approval, a low-barrier navigation center must have a plan that identifies staff to provide the services necessary to connect residents to permanent housing. It must also be linked to a coordinated entry system, which is designed to align intake, assessment, and referrals for housing and services. Additionally, the center must comply with Housing First requirements, ensuring that housing is provided without preconditions such as sobriety or treatment participation. Finally, it must have a system for entering information into the local Homeless Management Information System, which tracks and monitors service use.

Approval Timeline
Jurisdictions have 30 days to review an application and notify the applicant if it is complete. Within 60 days of receipt of a completed application, the jurisdiction must approve or deny the application. If the proposed project meets all statutory requirements, the jurisdiction is required to approve it.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Watsonville,
November 19, 2024
Low-barrier navigation centers must be processed as a byright use in mixed-use zones and nonresidential zones that allow residential uses. The letter clarifies that the project shall not be subject to any form of discretionary approval.

The letter further describes project eligibility criteria and provides statutory examples of “low-barrier.”
The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 406 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet By-Right Approval for Low Barrier Navigation Centers April 2026 2 of 2

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Interim Housing Act
SB 1395, Becker (2024);
amended Gov. Code, §§
8698.4, 65660, amended
Pub. Resource Code, §
21080.27.5, and added
Welfare and Institutions
Code, § 8255.

SB 1395 updates regulations for Low Barrier Navigation
Centers by clarifying that they can be non-congregate and relocatable, expanding flexibility in shelter design. It also removes the 2027 repeal date, making the provisions
permanent under state law. These changes aim to ensure
continued access to low-barrier shelter options for people experiencing homelessness.

Page 407 ends

By-Right Supportive Housing Provisions April 2026 1 of 2

BY-RIGHT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROVISIONS
Government Code §§ 65650-65656

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
Supportive housing is housing with no limit on length of stay that is linked to onsite or offsite services that
assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving their health status, and maximizing
their ability to live and, when possible, work in the
community. Supportive housing projects that meet
certain conditions must be processed as a by-right use
in zones that allow multifamily residential development or mixed-use development. In smaller jurisdictions,
specific limitations apply to by-right approval based on population and homelessness figures.

KEY PROVISIONS
Project Eligibility
To qualify for by-right approval, a project must designate 100 percent of its units, excluding managers’ units, as affordable to lower-income households. In addition, at least 25 percent of the units must be used for supportive housing, except for projects with 12 or fewer units, where all units must be designated as supportive housing. A deed restriction must ensure the specified affordability for 55 years. If any qualifying residential units are being demolished as part of the project, the developer must comply with replacement housing requirements under State Density Bonus Law even if the project is not using the benefits of that law.

Limitations for Smaller Jurisdictions
In cities and unincorporated areas with populations under 200,000, where the most recent point-in-time count shows fewer than 1,500 individuals experiencing homelessness, by-right approval is limited to supportive housing projects of 50 units or fewer. However, jurisdictions may choose to allow by-right approval for larger projects.

Development Standards and Parking Requirements
Jurisdictions may require projects to comply with objective, written development standards that apply to other multifamily residential developments in the same zone.

They may not impose development standards that are specific to supportive housing projects. This aligns with Housing Element Law, which mandates that transitional and supportive housing be treated the same as all other residential uses in a given zone. In addition, jurisdictions are prohibited from imposing parking requirements on supportive housing units if the project is located within one-half mile of transit.

Application Review and Approval Timelines
As part of the application submittal, the developer is required to provide a plan for providing supportive services onsite to residents. The plan must include the name of the The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 408 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet By-Right Supportive Housing Provisions April 2026 2 of 2 proposed entities that will provide supportive services, proposed funding sources for the supportive services, and proposed staffing levels.

Jurisdictions must notify developers within 30 days of submission whether the application is complete. Once the application is complete, the review process must be completed within 60 days after the application is complete for projects with 50 or fewer units and within 120 days after the application is complete for projects exceeding 50 units. If a project meets all statutory requirements, it must be approved.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Sutter Creek,
May 24, 2022
AB 2162 requires supportive housing projects meeting
specific criteria to be processed by-right in zones allowing multifamily residential or mixed-use development, meaning local governments must approve qualifying projects without requiring discretionary permits such as conditional use permits. Additionally, local jurisdictions must review by-right supportive housing applications within 60 days for projects with 50 or fewer units and within 120 days for projects with more than 50 units to ensure timely approval.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Supportive Housing:

Administrative Office
Space
AB 1801, Jackson
(2024); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65650 and
65651
Builds on AB 2162 by refining supportive housing
requirements. It mandates that developments with over 20 units allocate at least 3 percent of total floor space for supportive services and allows administrative office space within the nonresidential area, capped at 25 percent of total floor space. It also expands “supportive housing” to include transitional housing for youth and young adults. These
updates provide greater flexibility in supportive housing design while maintaining streamlined, by-right approvals.

Supportive Housing
By-Right
AB 2162, Chiu (2018);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65583 and added
Article 11
(commencing with §
65650)
Requires that supportive housing be a use by right—without a conditional use or other discretionary permit—in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones where multifamily uses are permitted, if the proposed housing development meets specified local
objective standards.

Page 409 ends

State Density Bonus Law April 2026 1 of 7

STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW
Government Code §§ 65915, 65914.1, 65915.2, 65915.5

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The State Density Bonus Law (SDBL) is a longstanding feature of state law that provides benefits to developers when they agree to include affordable
housing in projects of five or more units. The law has
undergone numerous changes over the years,
maintaining its status as one of California’s most
frequently used housing laws. Local jurisdictions must
adopt a local density bonus ordinance that meets state
requirements. Even without such an ordinance, local
agencies must provide developers the benefits to
which the law entitles them.

KEY PROVISIONS
Privileges of State Density Bonus Law
Under the SDBL, developers are entitled to any or all of the following, at their discretion, if they include the requisite percentage of affordable units in a housing development project: an increase in allowable density, concessions and incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reductions in parking requirements.

State Density Bonus Eligibility
The percentage of affordable units is calculated off the base project, meaning the total number of units prior to any units added through additional density or other benefits of the law. The base project’s density is based on the gross residential density of the parcel(s) that comprise(s) the housing development site and the highest residential density available under the zoning ordinance, specific plan, or land use element of the general plan.

To qualify for benefits under the law, developers must provide at least one of the following:
 Very Low-Income. 5 percent of the units affordable to very low-income households,  Low-Income. 10 percent of the units affordable to low-income households,  Moderate-Income. 10 percent of the units affordable to moderate-income households in a for-sale development,
 Lower-Income Students. 20 percent of the “units” affordable to lower-income students in a student housing development (e.g., dorm- or congregate-style buildings where a unit is a bed plus a share of the common facilities), or  Seniors. A senior housing development or senior mobile home park.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 410 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 2 of 7
Increase in Allowable Density
If a developer has a project that meets the eligibility requirements, jurisdictions must grant an increase in allowable density. A developer can also request a lesser amount of density increase or no density increase at all. In addition, a jurisdiction may adopt an ordinance that offers additional density beyond what is specified in the SDBL.

General Projects
For most projects, the allowable density increase is based on a sliding scale depending on the percentage of affordable units included, as follows:
 Very Low-Income Projects. A 20- to 50-percent increase in density for including 5 to 15 percent very low-income units.
 Low-Income Projects. A 20- to 50-percent increase in density for including 10 to 24 percent low-income units.
 Moderate-Income For-Sale Projects. A 5- to 50-percent density increase for including 10 to 44 percent moderate-income units in a for-sale development.

Jurisdictions must also grant an additional “stacking” density bonus based on a sliding scale if a project would not restrict more than 50 percent of the total pre-density bonus units to moderate- or lower-income households and includes additional affordable units, as follows:
 Very Low-Income Projects. An additional 20- to 38.75-percent increase in density for including 5 to 10 percent very low-income units.
 Moderate-Income Projects. An additional 20- to 50-percent increase in density for including 5 to 15 percent moderate-income units (either for-sale or rental).

Senior and Student Housing Projects
For senior housing projects, the bonus is 20 percent of the number of senior units in the base project. For student housing projects, the bonus ranges from 35 to 50 percent, increasing based on the percentage of affordable student housing units. 100 Percent Affordable Housing Projects
For 100 percent affordable housing projects—if the final project, counting both base units and bonus units, will include at least 80 percent (and up to 100 percent) lowerincome units and no more than 20-percent moderate-income units—the developer is entitled to a bonus equal to 80 percent of the number of lower-income units in the base project.

If an affordable housing project is located within a half mile of a major transit stop, the jurisdiction may not impose any limits on density (i.e., the developer is entitled to as many additional units as can fit on the project site but may be limited by the local government to no more than three additional stories of building height).

Concessions or Incentives
The term “concessions and incentives” is defined broadly to include:

Page 411 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 3 of 7
 A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission that result in cost reductions.
 Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and the non-housing uses are compatible with the housing project and existing or planned development in the area.
 Any other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the jurisdiction that result in cost reductions.

Jurisdictions are legally obligated to grant requested concessions or incentives (i.e., “shall approve”) unless they find, based on substantial evidence, that the concession or incentive does not reduce costs; would have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety or a historical resource in a way that cannot be mitigated; or is against state or federal law.

Developers using SDBL are entitled to request specific concessions or incentives on a sliding scale as follows:
# of
Concessions Project Affordability
1 At least 5 percent very low-income units, 10 percent low-income units, 10 percent for-sale moderate-income units, or 20 percent lowerincome student housing in a student housing project. 2 At least 10 percent very low-income units, 17 percent low-income units, 20 percent for-sale moderate-income units, or 23 percent lowerincome student housing in a student housing project. 3 At least 15 percent very low-income units, 24 percent low-income units, or 30 percent for-sale moderate-income units
4 At least 16 percent lower-income units or at least 45 percent for-sale moderate-income units.
5 100 percent affordable.

Jurisdictions cannot limit developers to specific concessions and incentives listed in a local density bonus ordinance. Local density bonus ordinances may have a “menu” of concessions and incentives for developers to choose from, but developers are free to ask for things that are not on that list. Local jurisdictions, however, are not required to grant any concession that would serve to facilitate construction of the portion of a mixed-use development that contains a hotel use. In addition, concessions cannot be used to increase commercial floor area more than 2.5 times the base zone commercial floor area ratio.

Page 412 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 4 of 7
Waivers
In addition to concessions and incentives, developers are entitled to relief from development standards that physically preclude development of the project at the density and with the concessions and incentives allowed under the law, either through a reduction in the standard or through a waiver. For example, setback requirements or height limits may create challenges to accommodating a larger building on a site and may need to be reduced or waived entirely.

Jurisdictions may only deny requests for waivers or reductions of development standards for the same limited reasons as for rejecting a concession or incentive.

Affordable housing projects within a half mile of a major transit stop that receive unlimited density are entitled to an additional three stories or 33 feet of height.

Applicants that seek unlimited density may request additional waivers or reductions of development standards affecting height beyond the prescribed three additional stories, but the jurisdiction is not required to grant them.

Reduction in Parking Requirements
Developers are entitled to reductions in parking requirements. Generally, a jurisdiction may not require a density bonus project to include more than the following number of parking spaces:
 1 parking space for studios and 1-bedroom units
 1.5 parking spaces for 2- and 3-bedroom units
 2.5 parking spaces for 4- or more bedroom units
No parking spaces are required for special-needs housing, supportive housing, and senior housing more than a half mile from transit if served by paratransit, or any student housing development.

Further Reductions in Parking Requirement
 0.5 parking space per unit for projects with at least 20 percent low-income units or 11 percent very low-income units within a half mile of a major transit stop.  0.5 parking space per bedroom for projects with at least 40 percent moderateincome units within a half mile of a major transit stop.  No parking requirement for projects within a half mile of a major transit stop in which all units are affordable to lower-income households, including special-needs housing and supportive housing, and senior rental housing. Please note that Government Code section 65863.2 further restricts parking minimum requirements for developments near major transit stops.

Replacement Requirements
Developers must agree to replace certain units that are demolished in conjunction with the project, or that have been demolished on the project site within the last five years.

Replacement units count towards meeting the affordable housing set-aside requirement to qualify for benefits under the law. Units that must be replaced include:

Page 413 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 5 of 7
 Deed-restricted housing affordable to low- and very low-income households  Rent-controlled housing
 Housing that is or was occupied by low- or very low-income households A replacement unit must be affordable at the same or lower income level as the current occupant of the unit it is replacing, or at the most recent former occupant’s income level for vacant or already demolished units. In cases where the income level of current or former occupants is unknown, the replacement obligation is determined by formula.

The majority of rental replacement units will be deed-restricted for at least 55 years to be affordable to either low- or very low-income households. The exception is when the rental unit is replacing a rent-controlled unit that is currently occupied by a household with an income above low-income (i.e., above 80 percent of area median income). In this case, it is up to the jurisdiction to decide whether the developer must replace that unit with a deed-restricted unit affordable to low-income households or with a new rentcontrolled unit pursuant to the jurisdiction’s rent control ordinance.

If the proposed development is for-sale units, the replacement units must also be forsale units and must be sold to low-, very low-, or moderate-income households at an affordable price.

Replacement units must be of equivalent size to the units they are replacing. However, when a project is replacing multiple units, the “equivalent size” requirement can be met by replacing the total number of bedrooms across multiple units. For example, a project that has an obligation to replace five three-bedroom units and five one-bedroom units could meet the replacement obligation with 10 two-bedroom units.

RECENT OPINION FROM ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE
In April 2025, the Attorney General’s Office issued an opinion that a city or county may not impose its local affordable housing requirements, such as inclusionary zoning, on the density bonus units awarded under SDBL.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of San Diego,
December 12, 2024
SDBL permits the City to approve the requested incentive and associated waiver or to deny the requested incentive and associated waiver by making a written finding, based on substantial evidence, that the incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for
affordable housing.

City of Carlsbad,
February 16, 2024
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) may count toward the fiveunit eligibility criteria for a housing development project, but ADUs do not count for density bonus calculations.

City of El Cajon,
February 16, 2023
A project may use SDBL on a site with existing units. The existing units may be physically altered or deed restricted to qualify as dependent units. SDBL does not contain

Page 414 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 6 of 7
comparability or dispersal requirements. Deed restrictions may float between units.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Concessions for
Commercial Floor
Area Ratio
SB 92, Blakespear
(2025); amended Gov.

Code, § 65915.

Limits the use of concessions that would allow an increase of commercial floor area ratio beyond 2.5 times the current allowed base zone commercial floor area, and jurisdictions are not required to grant any concession that would serve to facilitate hotel or other transient lodging uses that are a part of a mixed-use development.

Maximum Allowable
Residential Density,
or Base Density
AB 1287, Alvarez
(2023); amended Gov.

Code, § 65915.

Increases the incentives or concessions for a 100% lower income project from 4 to 5. Clarifies that the maximum
allowable residential density, or base density, is defined as the greatest number of units allowed by the zoning, specific plan, or general plan land use element and any inconsistency between planning documents is irrelevant.

Parking, Low VMT,
Definitions,
Thresholds
AB 2334, Wicks
(2022); amended Gov.

Code, § 65915.

Makes the following changes to SDBL:
 Allowances to Low VMT Areas. Expands the height and
density provisions that apply for 100 percent affordable projects within a half mile of a major transit stop to also apply to “very low vehicle travel areas” within designated counties.
 No Parking Minimum Parking Requirements for 100%
Affordable Developments Under Certain Conditions.

Eliminates minimum parking requirements where 100
percent of the units are for lower-income households
within a half mile of a transit stop or the development is for individuals who are 55 years of age or older where the development has paratransit service or access to transit.  Minimum Lot Area and Maximum Allowable Density
Definitions. Includes “minimum lot area per unit” and
clarified that the definition of “maximum allowable
residential density” is the highest available density in the general plan, zoning code, or specific plan applies
regardless of document inconsistencies.
 Conditions for 100% Lower Income Developments.

Changes requirements applicable to qualifying
developments with 100 percent lower-income
developments by allowing the rent to be set at an amount consistent with the maximum rent levels for lower-income households determined by the California Tax Credit

Page 415 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet State Density Bonus Law April 2026 7 of 7
Allocation Committee. For enforcement of agreements for for-sale units, the local government may defer to the
equity sharing recapture provisions.

Imposition of Fees.

AB 571, Mayes (2021);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65915 § 65915.1.

Prohibits a jurisdiction from imposing affordable housing fees (i.e., fees intended to support the development of affordable housing within the jurisdiction) on the affordable units in a density bonus project.

Modifies the
Proportions of the
Density Bonus.

AB 2345, Gonzalez
(2020); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65400 and
65915.

Extends the charts that dictate the amount of density a developer gets in exchange for including affordable units to allow up to a 50-percent density bonus. Previously, the tables had stopped at a 35-percent density bonus. Also changes the percentage of affordable units at which a developer is entitled to an additional concession or incentive but did not change the previous statutory maximum of four. Reduces the
maximum number of parking spaces a jurisdiction can
require for two- and three-bedroom units from 2 to 1.5.

Reduces the number of parking spaces a jurisdiction can require for certain projects within a half mile of transit from

0.5 spaces per bedroom to 0.5 spaces per unit.

Page 416 ends

Five Hearing Rule April 2026 1 of 2

FIVE HEARING RULE
Government Code § 65905.5

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
As part of the Housing Crisis Act (HCA) of 2019, this
statute mandates that a local government may not
hold more than five hearings after an application is
deemed complete to consider a proposed housing
development project if the project complies with all
applicable, objective general plan and zoning
standards.
“Hearings” cover a variety of meeting types including
appeals, continuances, workshops, or other similar
meetings conducted by the city or county with respect
to the housing development project. Hearings required
to be conducted by law, ordinance, or regulation—
including by the recommending or decision-making
bodies (e.g., design review committee)—count towards the total. However, the five hearing rule does not apply to hearings to review legislative approvals required for a proposed housing development, such as a general plan or zoning amendment or specific plan adoption or amendment.

KEY PROVISIONS
Applicability
This section applies to an application for a proposed housing development as defined in the Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code, § 65589.5) that has submitted an application that meets all of the requirements in the relevant list compiled according to the Permit Streamlining Act (Gov. Code, § 65940) that was available at the time the application was deemed complete.

Maximum Five Hearings
Jurisdictions are limited to five hearings on an application for a housing development project if the project complies with the applicable objective general plan and zoning standards that were in effect at the time the application was deemed complete under the Permit Streamlining Act.
 Decision-Maker Action. Jurisdictions must take action to approve or disapprove the application during at least one of the five hearings.
 Continuance. Continued hearings count as one of the five hearings.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 417 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Five Hearing Rule April 2026 2 of 2

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Oceanside,
May 14, 2025
Community meetings count towards the five hearing limit when they are required to be conducted by law, ordinance, or regulation.

City of Encinitas,
February 5, 2025
A hearing includes any public hearing, including design review, a meeting to consider an appeal, and continued
hearings.

RECENT LEGISLATION
Five Hearings
Maximum
SB 330, Skinner
(2022); added Gov.

Code, § 65905.5.

Limits jurisdictions to five hearings after an application is deemed complete under the Permit Streamlining Act.

Page 418 ends

Housing Accountability Act April 2026 1 of 6

HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Government Code §§ 65589.5, 65589.5.1, 65589.5.2

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) limits local
governments’ ability to disapprove, condition, or
reduce the density of housing development projects,
emergency shelters, or farmworker housing that are
consistent with local objective development standards
and contribute to meeting housing need. As the
legislative findings that accompany the HAA note,
local decisionmakers in their review of housing
development projects must consider “the economic,
environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects,
reduction in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.”
The policy intent of the HAA is to increase approval and construction of new housing at all affordability levels, build more housing in urban areas, and provide additional protections for developments containing units for very low-, low-, or moderate-income households, including for applications deemed complete while a jurisdiction’s housing element is not substantially compliant with state law (builder’s remedy).

KEY PROVISIONS
The HAA has two key provisions:

Provision #1 Applies to All Housing Development Applications The first is a general provision that applies to all housing development applications, both market-rate and affordable, that are consistent with the objective general plan, zoning, design, and subdivision standards for the site that were in effect at the time that the project application was deemed complete. “Deemed complete” means that the applicant has submitted a preliminary application pursuant to Government Code section 65941.1 or, if the applicant has not submitted a preliminary application, has submitted a complete application pursuant to section 65943.

A housing development proposal that meets those criteria cannot be disapproved or approved with a condition that reduces the density of the project unless the jurisdiction makes both of the following findings:

Finding #1. Specific, Adverse Impact on Public Health or Safety. That the proposed development would have a “specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density.” Specific, adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 419 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Accountability Act April 2026 2 of 6
standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and
Finding #2. No Possible Mitigation. That “there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.”
Provision #2 Applies Only to Certain Affordable Housing (including Farmworker Housing), Emergency Shelters, and Smaller Housing Projects The second provision applies to a narrower category of projects: emergency shelters and housing developments, including farmworker housing, that are affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate-income households or certain smaller housing projects. A housing development project must meet one of the following criteria to be covered by this provision:
 Lower-Income or Moderate-Income Units. 100 percent of the units are deedrestricted for lower-income households (includes very low-income and low-income) or moderate-income households.
 Extremely Low-Income Units. 7 percent of the total units (excluding density bonus) are deed-restricted for extremely low-income households.  Very Low-Income Units. 10 percent of the total units (excluding density bonus) are deed-restricted for very low-income households.
 Lower-Income Units. 13 percent of the total units (excluding density bonus) are deed-restricted for lower-income households.
 Smaller Housing Projects. 10 or fewer total units (excluding density bonus) on a site that is less than one acre and has a minimum density of 10 units per acre. Can include 100 percent market-rate projects.

Under the limits of this second provision, a jurisdiction can only deny a qualifying housing development project or impose conditions on that project that render it infeasible if it can make one of several specified findings:

Finding #1. Compliant Housing Element and Meets Housing Targets. The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element that substantially complies with the law and has already met or exceeded its regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) for all income groups that would be served by the housing, or in the case of an emergency shelter, has already met or exceeded the need for shelter as identified in the housing element.

Finding #2. Specific, Adverse Impact on Public Health or Safety. The housing or shelter “would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially infeasible.” Finding #3. Compliance with State or Federal Law. The denial or conditions are necessary to comply with state or federal law and there is no other feasible alternative to the denial or conditions.

Page 420 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Accountability Act April 2026 3 of 6
Finding #4. Agricultural Land or Resource Preservation. The housing or shelter is proposed on land that is zoned for agricultural or resource preservation and either a) the land on at least two sides surrounding the property is currently used for agricultural or resource preservation or b) there are not adequate water or wastewater facilities available to serve the project.

Finding #5. Compliant Housing Element, Inconsistent with Zoning and General Plan Land Use, and Non-Housing Element Site or Emergency Shelter Project. The jurisdiction has an adopted, substantially compliant housing element and the proposed housing development or shelter is inconsistent with both the zoning code and general plan land use designation for the site, and either (1) the proposed project is not proposed on a site or candidate rezone site identified in the housing element for very low-, low-, or moderate-income households at the density specified in the housing element, or (2) the project is an emergency shelter and the local jurisdiction has zoned for by-right emergency shelters or zoned sufficiently to accommodate emergency shelters as identified in the housing element.

Finding #6. Non-Compliant Housing Element and Not a Builder’s Remedy Project. The jurisdiction’s housing element is out of compliance and the proposed project (1) does not qualify as a builder’s remedy project and (2) is not consistent with the objective general plan, zoning, design, and subdivision standards for the site that were in effect at the time that the project application was deemed complete (see Provision #1 above.) There are several practical implications to these limitations on projects that are important to note.
 Non-Compliant Housing Element and Builder’s Remedy. A jurisdiction that has failed to adopt a housing element in compliance with state law may be prohibited from disapproving of an affordable housing development or certain smaller housing projects, even if the proposed project is inconsistent with the zoning and general plan land use designation on the site. In order to qualify as a builder’s remedy project, the proposed project must not be located on or near a heavy industrial use and meet the density limits as specified within Government Code section 65589.5 subdivision (h)(11).
 Compliant Housing Element and Insufficient Rezoning. Jurisdictions that have adopted a substantially compliant housing element may face limits in denying an affordable housing development or emergency shelter unless the jurisdiction has zoned enough land to accommodate all of its housing and shelter needs.

HAA Consistency Review Timeline
After an application is determined to be complete, local agencies have a set timeline to determine in writing whether the application is inconsistent with objective general plan, zoning, subdivision, and design standards and criteria; otherwise, the application is deemed consistent by default. In the event that a local government misses a 30-day completeness deadline and the application becomes complete under operation of law, a 30- or 60-day consistency determination clock still begins. Projects containing 150 or fewer units must be reviewed within 30 calendar days and projects containing more

Page 421 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Accountability Act April 2026 4 of 6
than 150 units must be reviewed within 60 calendar days. Any additional density or any concessions and development standard reductions or waivers to which the project is entitled under State Density Bonus Law (SDBL) shall be considered consistent with objective zoning, design review, and subdivision standards.

Postentitlement Phase Permits and the HAA
While requirements for postentitlement phase permits are not part of the HAA, a project is considered disapproved under the HAA if a local agency does not adhere to the time limits specified for reviewing and processing a postentitlement permit (i.e., building permits, demolition permits, and permits for standard off-site improvements and excavation and grading). Local agencies have 15 business days to determine whether a postentitlement permit application contains all the information required from an applicant, and 30 or 60 days to determine whether the application complies with permit standards depending on the number of units proposed. For certain smaller housing development projects, the local agency must inspect permitted work within 10 days of receiving a notice of completion.

HAA Enforcement
The HAA can be enforced by the applicant, any person who would be eligible to live in the proposed housing or shelter, or a housing organization. Housing organizations are defined as either a “trade or industry group whose local members are primarily engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or advocating for increased access to housing for lowincome households.” Housing organizations must have provided their comments orally or in writing to the local agency prior to its action and can only challenge disapproval of a project. The statute does not provide standing for housing organizations to challenge a violation that does not involve a denial of the project.

A jurisdiction that violates the HAA can be subject to both an order compelling it to take action to come into compliance and fines if it fails to comply with the court’s order. If the court finds that the denial or conditional approval was in bad faith, the court can effectively order the housing development or emergency shelter proposal approved.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of San Jose,
February 7, 2025
A builder’s remedy project is not automatically precluded from meeting the conditions required for a CEQA Class 32 infill exemption determination.

City of Menlo Park,
November 26, 2024
Local jurisdictions cannot require a general plan amendment or zoning change for a builder’s remedy project.

City of Gilroy,
July 23, 2024
Local jurisdictions must separate incompleteness and
inconsistency review items, and builder’s remedy prevents disapproval for inconsistency with either general plan or zoning.

Page 422 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Accountability Act April 2026 5 of 6

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS
Mixed-use
development criteria
SB 838, Durazo
(2025); amended Gov.

Code, § 65589.5.

Redefines a “mixed-use development” to exclude any portion used as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging with the exception of a residential hotel.

Building Permit
Inspections
AB 1308, Hoover
(2025); amended Gov.

Code, § 65589.5, and
added Health and
Safety Code §
17970.3.

Specifies a 10-day time limit for building permit inspection of certain smaller permitted housing development projects.

Failing to meet the time limit would constitute a local agency’s disapproval of the housing development project.

Builder’s Remedy,
and Expanded
Definitions, Criteria
AB 1893, Wicks
(2024); amended Gov.

Code, § 65589.5.

Expands the definition of “disapprove the housing
development” to include administrative actions and certain provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act among others.

Amended the definition of “housing for lower income
households, mixed-income households, and housing for
moderate-income households” to include a range of
affordability mix. Prescribes residential density standards and objective development standards that apply to a builder’s remedy project.

CEQA Disapproval
Procedures
AB 1413, Ting (2024);
added Gov. Code, §§
65589.5.1 and
65589.5.2
Expands CEQA disapproval criteria when a local agency fails to make a CEQA exemption determination or adopt a CEQA
environmental document. Requires a local agency to file notice within 5 days of receiving a timely written notice from the applicant. Requires a minimum 60-day public comment period and consideration of the applicant’s objectives, comments, evidence, and concerns in their notice.

CEQA Disapprovals
AB 1633, Ting (2023);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65589.5.

Establishes that a local agency’s failure to make a
determination that the project is exempt from CEQA; abuse of discretion; or failure to adopt, approve, or certify an environmental review document constitutes a disapproval.

General Plan
Consistency
AB 3194, Daly (2018);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65589.5
Establishes that a housing development project need not be consistent with the zoning if it is consistent with the general plan designation. Includes a statement of legislative intent disfavoring denials based on an adverse impact to health and safety, noting that conditions allowing for such a finding should “arise infrequently.”

Page 423 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Accountability Act April 2026 6 of 6
Preponderance of
Evidence; Lower
Density Definition
AB 678, Bocanegra &
SB 167, Skinner
(2017); amended Gov.

Code, § 65589.5
Expands findings to be reviewed under the more restrictive “preponderance of the evidence” standard rather than the “substantial evidence” test that had previously applied.

Expands the definition of “lower density” to include any action that has the same impact on the ability of the project to provide housing as reducing the density. Authorizes fines and other remedies for noncompliant jurisdictions.

Reasonable Person
Standard
AB 1515, Daly (2017);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65589.5
Requires jurisdictions make findings that a housing
development project is consistent with local plans, programs, ordinances, standards, and policies if a reasonable person would conclude that the project is consistent.

Page 424 ends

Housing Crisis Act April 2026 1 of 5

HOUSING CRISIS ACT
Government Code §§ 65913.10, 65940, 66300, 66300.5, 66300.6

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The Housing Crisis Act (HCA) limits the ability of cities and counties to (among other provisions):
 Change the general plan land use designation,
specific plan land use designation, or zoning to a
less intensive use or reduce the intensity of land
use within an existing general plan land use
designation, specific plan land use designation, or
zoning district below that which was in effect on
January 1, 2018;
 Impose a moratorium or similar restriction or
limitation on housing development; or
 Cap the number of housing units that can be
approved or constructed.

More detail is available on HCD’s website about Designated Jurisdictions Prohibited from Certain Zoning-Related Actions.

KEY PROVISIONS
HCD is required to develop and maintain a list of cities (“affected cities”) and census designated places (CDPs) within the unincorporated county (“affected counties”) that are prohibited from taking certain zoning-related actions.

Prohibited Actions by Affected Jurisdictions
Affected jurisdictions are prohibited from taking a range of actions that would limit or decrease residential development capacity or construction in the jurisdiction. Where housing is an allowable use, an affected county or city cannot enact a development policy, standard, or condition that would have the following effects:

General Plan Land Use, Specific Plan, or Zoning
Changing the general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning to a less intensive use below what was allowed by the land use designations or zoning in effect on January 1, 2018.
 Exception: Jurisdictions may change a land use designation or zoning to a lessintensive use if that change is accompanied by a concurrent increase in residential density elsewhere in the community.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 425 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Crisis Act April 2026 2 of 5
Moratorium or Similar Restrictions
Imposing a moratorium or similar restriction on housing development except to address an imminent threat to health and safety. Any moratorium must be approved by HCD before it can be enforced.
 Exception: The law includes an exception to moratoriums or other limitations on residential development capacity if the policy is intended to preserve or facilitate the production of housing for lower-income households or housing types that traditionally serve lower-income households. For example, several cities around the state have removed mobile home parks from zones that otherwise allow high-density residential development to decrease pressure to redevelop those properties. This type of action to preserve and stabilize housing serving vulnerable populations continues to be allowed under the HCA.

Objective Design Standards
Imposing design review standards established on or after January 1, 2020 that are not objective.

Limitation on Permits, Housing Units, or Population
Limiting the number of housing development permits that can be issued or the number of housing units that can be constructed, or establishing or implementing any provision that limits the population of the county or city.

Demolition and Replacement of Protected Units
Additionally, the HCA requires housing development projects to create at least as many units as will be demolished during construction of the project in an affected jurisdiction.

All development projects, including housing development projects and non-housing development projects, must replace any existing protected units on site and provide relocation benefits to existing occupants of protected units. Replacement units required for non-housing projects must be developed prior to or concurrently with the development project and may be located on a site other than the project site but must be located within the same jurisdiction.

HCA No Net Loss
The HCA requires no net loss of housing units in the development of new housing in an affected jurisdiction and the replacement of any existing housing units that qualify as protected units. If a housing project is demolishing existing residential units, the jurisdiction can only approve the project if it will include at least as many units as are being demolished. In addition, development projects that are demolishing what are known as “protected units” must comply with additional replacement requirements to be approved. This applies to development projects beyond just housing projects that are demolishing existing protected units on the site.

Page 426 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Crisis Act April 2026 3 of 5
Protected Units
Protected units include the following:
 Units that are, or have been within the last five years, deed-restricted housing affordable to lower income or very low-income households.  Units that are or have been rented within the last five years by lower-income or very low-income households.
 Units that are, or have been within the last five years, rent-controlled.  Units that have been withdrawn from the rental market within the past 10 years pursuant to the Ellis Act.

Replacement of Protected Units
A developer must commit to replacing all protected units in the new project.

Replacement requirements largely mirror those under the state density bonus law (SDBL) and replacement units may be used towards meeting SDBL requirements or a local inclusionary housing requirement.
 Replacement units must be affordable at the same or lower income level as the household that is or was last in occupancy and be deed-restricted for 55 years for rental units or subject to an equity-sharing agreement for for-sale units.  If the income level of the household that is or was last in occupancy is unknown, it is rebuttably presumed that lower-income and/or very low-income households (depending on if the units are vacant or demolished) occupied these units in the same proportion as lower income and/or very low-income households to all renter households within the jurisdiction based on the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database (CHAS).
 In the case of a rent-controlled unit occupied by a household above lowerincome limits, the jurisdiction may choose to require replacement with a deedrestricted unit affordable to low-income households or a rent-controlled unit.  Replacement units must be of an equivalent size to the units they are replacing. If more than one protected unit is being replaced, the “equivalent size” requirement can be met by providing replacement units that contain at least the same total number of bedrooms across all replacement units. • Example: If a developer has an obligation to replace three 3-bedroom protected units and three 1-bedroom protected units, this could be met with six 2-bedroom replacement units.

Tenant Protections
In addition to complying with replacement obligations, developers must do the following for protected units that are currently occupied:
 Allow occupants to remain in their units until six months before the start of construction activities.
 Provide relocation assistance for existing occupants of any protected units that are lower-income households.

Page 427 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Crisis Act April 2026 4 of 5
 Provide a right of first refusal for a comparable unit affordable to the household at an affordable rent or housing cost in the new development, or in any required replacement units associated with a new development that is not a housing development, for existing occupants of any protected units that are lower income.

Local Ordinances
The HCA’s demolition restrictions and replacement requirements do not supersede any objective provision of a locally adopted ordinance that are more protective. A local ordinance applies—rather than the provisions of the HCA—if that ordinance is objective and places restrictions on the demolition of residential units or the subdivision of residential rental units that are:
 More protective of lower-income households,
 Requires the provision of a greater number of units affordable to lower-income households, or
 Requires greater relocation assistance to displaced households.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of San Jose,
October 16, 2024
Replacement units in for-sale projects must be provided as for-sale units, and because of City adoption of a compliant ordinance, applicants in the City can fulfill replacement unit requirements by providing for-sale Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as allowed under State ADU Law and State Density Bonus Law.

City of Riverside,
June 14, 2024
Changing residential to commercial zone is considered a net loss issue under the HCA and requires increase in residential capacity elsewhere within the jurisdiction.

City of Los Angeles,
August 28, 2024
While the HCA requires the developer to provide right of first refusal to existing occupants of any protected units that are lower-income households, it does not state that comparable units must be deed-restricted in the same manner as
protected units for replacement purposes under the HCA.

City of Carlsbad,
December 14, 2023
Affordable dwelling units used to qualify a housing
development for State Density Bonus Law may be counted
towards the replacement units required when affordable
housing is demolished.

LEGISLATION HIGHLIGHTS
Replacement and
Relocation
Provisions
Expands provisions regarding demolition of housing units to prohibit affected cities or counties from approving any development project, not just housing development projects,

Page 428 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Crisis Act April 2026 5 of 5
AB 1218, Lowenthal
(2023); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65912.114,
65912.124, 65940, and
66300; reorganized
provisions under Gov.

Code, §§ 66300.5 and
66300.6
that requires demolition of occupied or vacant protected units (including sites where protected units were demolished in the previous 5 years) unless certain conditions are met.

Protected units, including those demolished on or after January 1, 2020, must be replaced prior to or concurrently with the development project.

Added to HCD
enforcement
authority
AB 215, Chiu (2021);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65585
Adds a number of laws to the list of laws that fall under HCD’s AB 72 enforcement authority, including the Housing Crisis Act of 2019.

Restricting Rezones,
Limits to Housing
Development, and
Demolition of
Existing Housing.

SB 330, Skinner
(2019); amended Gov.

Code, § 65589.5 and
added Gov. Code, §
66300
Makes a number of changes to the law that limit local review of housing projects, restrict the ability of jurisdictions to rezone residential sites or place limits on housing
development, and limit the demolition of existing housing.

Some of the bill’s provisions apply statewide, while others apply only in affected cities and counties such as urbanized areas or urban clusters.

Page 429 ends

Housing Element Law April 2026 1 of 5

HOUSING ELEMENT LAW
Government Code §§ 65580-65589.11

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The housing element is the plan for how every city and
county will meet the existing and projected housing
needs of all income groups within the jurisdiction.

Housing Element Law is also part of a broader
statewide framework to reduce regional and local
patterns of housing segregation by removing barriers
to housing production—particularly affordable
housing—and ensure that every local jurisdiction in
the state does its part to plan for the housing needs at all income levels.

HCD created Building Blocks: A Comprehensive
Housing-Element Guide to assist jurisdictions in
creating comprehensive housing elements. For
additional technical assistance resources, please view the following link: Building Blocks | California Department of Housing and Community Development.

KEY PROVISIONS
General Plan Framework
The housing element is one of several required elements of a jurisdiction’s general plan.

Every city and county must adopt and periodically update its general plan, generally every 8 years. Project entitlements, including subdivision maps, and local legislative actions (e.g., specific plans, zoning ordinances) must be consistent with the general plan. Each of the general plan’s elements must also be consistent with one another, ensuring an internally consistent document to guide planning and development within the jurisdiction. The housing element is unique within the general plan because it requires specific actions and commitments by the jurisdiction to facilitate housing development and the element must be reviewed and certified by HCD.

Site Inventory Requirements
One of the most important requirements of the housing element is the preparation of an inventory of available sites suitable to accommodate its assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for each income group. These income groups include Very Low, Low, Moderate, and Above Moderate, representing different percentage ranges of Area Median Income (AMI). This analysis requires the jurisdiction to calculate how many new units may be accommodated on each inventory site and demonstrate that each site is “suitable and available” for the development of housing within the 8-year planning period. This includes determining that the sites are served by infrastructure (or that there is a plan to serve them) and have appropriate zoning and development standards in place.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 430 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Element Law April 2026 2 of 5
Density Minimums
Sites designated to meet the need for lower-income households must be zoned at densities sufficient to accommodate housing affordable to these income groups. This standard can be demonstrated in two ways.
 The jurisdiction can rely on a set of minimum default densities set forth in the statute.

These default densities—sometimes known as “Mullin densities” after the name of the author of the bill that enacted them—vary by the community type, ranging from 10 units per acre for an unincorporated area in a nonmetropolitan county, to 30 units per acre in a metropolitan jurisdiction. HCD publishes a list of jurisdictions and their respective “default” density standards that are deemed appropriate to accommodating housing for lower-income households. Zoning that accommodates the default density is presumed to be sufficient to support the development of housing for lower-income households. For additional details, please view the following link: Default Density Memo.
 The jurisdiction can demonstrate that certain densities support feasible developments for that income group based on market demand, financial feasibility, and development trends. This method is generally rare and subject to HCD review.

Programs to Address Gaps
After evaluating the inventory based on statutory requirements, if the inventory shows a shortfall for one or more income categories, the housing element must contain a program to make additional adequate sites available to accommodate the entire RHNA during the housing element planning period. For example, if a jurisdiction has a RHNA of 1,000 units for low-income households, the inventory must show that there are enough sites to accommodate at least 1,000 new units of housing zoned at appropriate multifamily densities. If not, the housing element must have a program that commits the jurisdiction to rezone land or take other actions to make additional sites available.

In addition, the program must designate sites sufficient to meet the RHNA for lowerincome households with a zoning that permits development by-right for projects where at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower-income households. By right means that a project must be approved without discretionary action that would trigger environmental review requirements. This program can include a number of actions by the local government, including rezoning land to residential from other uses or increasing the density and development standards on existing residential sites. If a housing element is certified by the due date, a jurisdiction has three years to complete the rezoning program.

Other Requirements in the Housing Element
Beyond identifying sufficient sites to meet the RHNA, the housing element must include analyses, programs, and objectives on a number of topics critical to addressing the existing and projected need for housing affordable at all income levels. The following is a broad overview of key requirements that must be included in the housing element:
 Analysis of existing demographics and housing need. The element must include an analysis of existing need for housing for various income levels and populations.

Page 431 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Element Law April 2026 3 of 5
This includes an analysis of the number of households that are living in overcrowded or substandard housing, the number of households overpaying for housing— generally defined as those paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing, and housing need for special need populations such as persons experiencing homelessness, seniors, persons with disabilities, large families, and extremely lowincome households.  Identification and removal of constraints to housing. Housing elements must include an analysis of governmental and non-governmental constraints to the development of housing for all income levels. This includes an evaluation of development standards, permit processing procedures, housing for persons with disabilities, fees, building standards, and other governmental regulations that affect the development of housing. The element must also ensure that the jurisdiction has zoning to accommodate a variety of housing types including multifamily, housing for farmworkers, supportive housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters.

Where identified, the element must include programs to minimize or remove constraints.
 Sites for shelters. Housing elements must identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are permitted without discretionary approval. If such a zone does not exist, the jurisdiction must include a program to create one. (See HCD memo dated December 29, 2022, for additional details on emergency shelters.)  Preservation of existing affordable housing. Housing elements must include an analysis of existing subsidized housing that is at risk of converting to market rate within the next 10 years and the local, state, and federal resources available to preserve the housing as affordable. The element must also include programs to preserve these units where feasible, and to conserve and improve the existing affordable housing stock, including non-subsidized units at risk of demolition.  Affirmatively furthering fair housing. Housing elements must include an assessment of fair housing issues, including patterns, trends, conditions, and practices that result in impediments to fair housing choice and actions the jurisdiction will take to proactively increase access to housing choice and reduce segregation.

Public and HCD Review
In drafting and adopting the element, jurisdictions must engage in a public process that ensures participation by all economic segments of the community. Once the public process is completed, the draft housing element is submitted to HCD for review. Upon receiving the initial draft, HCD has 90 days to issue findings to the jurisdiction as to whether the draft element substantially complies with the law, or if it does not, an explanation of what changes are necessary to bring it into compliance. Once a jurisdiction has made changes to address HCD’s findings—often an iterative process during which HCD has 60 days to review each subsequent draft—the final element is adopted by the jurisdiction and submitted to HCD for final approval.

Page 432 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Element Law April 2026 4 of 5
Implementation
Following adoption of the element, the law requires jurisdictions to implement the programs in the housing element and to make planning and land use decisions and approvals consistent with the adopted element. Failure to do so may result in HCD’s removal of its finding of compliance.

Results of Noncompliance
Significant penalties apply if the housing element is not updated and certified by HCD.

These penalties include, but are not limited to:
 Shorter timelines to accomplish required rezonings.
 Ineligibility or de-prioritization for various state grant and incentives programs.  Inability to deny certain housing development projects based on inconsistency with local zoning and land use designation (“Builder’s Remedy”).  Potential litigation that can result in court-imposed fines of $10,000 to $100,000 per month which can be multiplied by a factor of 6 for continuing noncompliance.

Moreover, in any action brought by the Attorney General or HCD to enforce the adoption of housing element revisions, jurisdictions are subject to additional fines of between $10,000 and $50,000 per month for each failure to adopt court-ordered housing element revisions, assessed from the date of initial violation until the date the violation is cured, including all investigation and prosecution costs in a successful lawsuit. Other potential ramifications could include the loss of local land use authority to a court-appointed agent.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Santa
Barbara,
December 19, 2024
Clarifies that Housing Element Law does not allow local governments to deny by-right review for multifamily housing on reused housing element sites solely because a
subdivision is proposed. The housing component must be
approved ministerially if at least 20 percent of units are affordable to lower-income households, while the subdivision itself may undergo discretionary review under the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinances.

City of Pleasant Hill,
July 10, 2024
Addresses the City’s rezoning efforts under Housing Element Law and emphasizes the obligation to ensure that sites
identified in its housing element are rezoned to permit residential development by-right at appropriate densities and with sufficient development capacity. The draft rezoning ordinance does not fully comply with state law because it fails to allow residential use by-right on all identified sites.

Page 433 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Housing Element Law April 2026 5 of 5

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Emergency Shelter
Planning
AB 2339, Bloom
(2022); amended Gov.

Code §§ 65583 and
65863
Introduces stricter requirements for jurisdictions in planning emergency shelters. It limits the zones where shelters can be placed, mandates that existing uses on proposed sites do not impede shelter development, and expands the definition of emergency shelters to include facilities like navigation centers.

Required Comment
Period
AB 215, Chiu (2021);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65585
Requires jurisdictions to post draft housing elements for public comment at least 30 days before submitting to HCD, with an added 10-day period to respond to comments.

Subsequent revisions must be posted online and shared with interested parties at least 7 days in advance. Extends HCD’s review period for initial drafts from 60 to 90 days, while keeping the 60-day review window for revised drafts.

Consequences for
Late Adoption
AB 1398, Bloom
(2021); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65583,
65583.2, and 65588
Closes a loophole that allowed jurisdictions to avoid penalties by adopting unapproved housing elements. Requires
adoption of an HCD-approved housing element within 120
days of the deadline. If not met, jurisdictions must complete the required rezoning within one year instead of the usual three, replacing the prior four-year update penalty.

Affirmatively
Furthering Fair
Housing
AB 686, Santiago
(2018) amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65583 and
65583.2, added Gov.

Code § 8899.50
Requires that all housing element revisions that occur on or after January 1, 2021 include an assessment of fair housing issues, an analysis of the relationship between available sites and areas of high or low resources, and concrete actions in the form of programs to address identified fair housing issues and/or further promote AFFH.

Determination of
Adequate Sites
AB 1397, Low (2017);
amended Gov. Code,
§ 65580, 65583, and
65583.2
Increases scrutiny on non-vacant sites (e.g., existing
commercial or low-density residential uses) by requiring a detailed analysis of redevelopment potential, considering lease terms, market conditions, and past redevelopment
success. If over 50 percent of a jurisdiction’s low-income RHNA is on non-vacant sites, existing uses are presumed to block development unless proven otherwise. Restricts reuse of undeveloped sites from past housing elements, limits reliance on very small or large parcels, and requires realistic unit capacity assumptions based on comparable local
development patterns.

Page 434 ends

Limitations on Development Standards April 2026 1 of 2

LIMITATIONS ON DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Government Code § 65913.11

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
As part of the Building Opportunities for All Housing
package (2021), Government Code section 65913.11
sets limitations on floor area ratio (FAR) and lot
coverage standards that can be imposed on housing
projects of 3 to 10 units within multifamily or mixed-use zones. The section specifies minimum FARs and
supersedes local lot coverage standards that
physically preclude projects from achieving the
minimum FARs allowed by state law.

KEY PROVISIONS
Applicability
This section applies to a legal parcel or parcels that meet either of the following criteria:
 If in a city: City boundary includes some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or  If in unincorporated area: Parcel(s) is wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster as designated by the United States Census Bureau.

Minimum Floor Area Ratios
For housing development projects in multifamily or mixed-use zoning districts, local agencies cannot impose an FAR development standard less than the following:
 1.0 FAR for projects with 3 to 7 units, or
 1.25 FAR for projects with 8 to 10 units.

Example Minimum FAR Minimum Total Floor Area
 3,000 sf parcel
 5 units proposed

1.0 3,000 sf
Average 600 sf per unit
 8,000 sf parcel
 8 units proposed

1.25 10,000 sf
Average 1,250 sf per unit
sf = square foot or square feet
The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 435 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Limitations on Development Standards April 2026 2 of 2
Limitations on Lot Coverage Maximums
The local jurisdiction must also waive the lot coverage requirement if it would preclude the housing development project from achieving the minimum FAR allowed by statute.

Lot coverage typically refers to the portion of a site that contains the footprint of a building or a building projection (e.g., bay windows), or is covered by a roofed structure (e.g., covered porch).

Example Max. Lot
Coverage
Applicability of Lot Coverage Requirement
 5,000 sf parcel
 5 units proposed
40% If the applicant proposes a 5-unit, single-story
5,000 sf development on a 5,000 sf parcel
(1.0 FAR, 100% lot coverage), the local
agency must waive the 40% maximum lot
coverage requirement to allow the project to
achieve the minimum FAR of 1.0.

RECENT LEGISLATION
Floor Area Ratio and Lot
Coverage Standards
SB 478, Weiner (2021);
amended Gov. Code, §
65585 and added Gov.

Code, § 65913.11.

SB 478 prohibits a local agency from imposing a floor
area ratio limit lower than 1.0 for developments of 3 to 7 units, or 1.25 for 8 to 10 units.

Page 436 ends

Duplexes and Lot Splits (SB 9) April 2026 1 of 4
DUPLEXES AND LOT SPLITS (SB 9)
Government Code §§ 65852.21, 66411.7

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
Senate Bill (SB) 9 (Chapter 162, Statutes of 2021)
requires ministerial approval of a housing
development with no more than two primary units in a
single-family zone, the subdivision of a parcel in a
single-family zone into two parcels, or both. SB 9
facilitates the creation of up to two primary housing
units on a parcel typically used for one single-family
home. For additional guidance on SB 9’s
requirements, please refer to HCD’s SB 9 Fact Sheet.

KEY PROVISIONS
Applicability in Single-Family Residential
Zones
A lot zoned for single-family residential within an urbanized area may be developed by right through two mechanisms, or a combination of both. First, the statute allows an applicant with a qualifying single-family lot to subdivide it into two lots of roughly equal size. Secondly, the law allows an applicant that is not subdividing to propose up to two primary units on a parcel plus ADUs as permitted under ADU law. If the lot is split using SB9, up to two units can be constructed on each of the two newly-created lots. A jurisdiction may deny an SB 9 application only if the lot split or development project would have a specific adverse impact on public health and safety or the physical environment that cannot be mitigated.

Jurisdictions may impose objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards on both lot splits and housing developments using SB 9. However, local objective standards cannot preclude the development of one or two units of at least 800 square feet each on a qualifying lot. Local objective standards also cannot preclude the creation of two 1,200 square-foot lots. In addition, jurisdictions can only apply objective standards to housing developments proposed using SB 9 if those standards are applied uniformly to development within the underlying zoning district. A jurisdiction may adopt objective standards for housing developments proposed pursuant to SB 9 that are more permissive than the underlying zoning.

For housing developments, jurisdictions may require:
 Parking. Off-street parking of up to one space per unit, except no parking can be required if the parcel is within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, or within a block of a car-share vehicle.  Setbacks. A rear and side setback of up to four feet, except where there is an existing structure with less or no setback.

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 437 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Duplexes and Lot Splits (SB 9) April 2026 2 of 4
Lot Splits
For lot splits, jurisdictions may require easements where they are required for public services and utilities, and any requirements needed to ensure the parcel has access to or adjoins a public right-of-way. These requirements should be designed to facilitate access without physically precluding the lot split. Jurisdictions shall not require:
 Dedications of rights-of-way.
 Construction of offsite improvements.
 Conformance with objective standards that are not related to the design or improvement of a parcel.
 The correction of nonconforming zoning conditions.

Maximum Achievable Units, ADUs, and JADUs
Where an urban lot split is utilized, a local agency must allow two units on each of the resulting lots. On a site that was not created with an urban lot split, the lot would be eligible for up to two primary dwellings under SB 9 and any number of ADUs as permitted under ADU Law. For example, an applicant may propose two units pursuant to SB 9, and an ADU and JADU. Local agencies should also consult HCD’s ADU Handbook for more information on ADU and JADU Law.

Review and Approval Timeline
SB 9 establishes a timeline by which a local agency must approve or deny an application. A complete application for a housing development or urban lot split must be approved or denied within 60 days from the date the local agency receives it. In addition, the Permit Streamlining Act establishes that a local agency must determine whether an application for a development project is complete within 30 days from the date the local agency received the application.

Tenancy Requirements, No Short-Term Rental
A jurisdiction must require that any rental units created under this process be rented for terms greater than 30 days, a provision intended to prevent their use as short-term rentals. In addition, an applicant for an urban lot split must sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to live in one of the units as their principal residence for at least three years from the date of approval of the urban lot split unless the applicant is a community land trust or nonprofit organization.

Exceptions
SB 9 provisions do not apply if the proposed unit construction or urban lot split requires the demolition or alteration of housing that:
 Is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income;  Is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power; or

Page 438 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Duplexes and Lot Splits (SB 9) April 2026 3 of 4
 Has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years.

SB 9 provisions also do not apply to:
 A parcel where units were withdrawn from the rental market pursuant to the Ellis Act in the last 15 years.
 A contributing structure within a historic district or a historical resource on the State Historic Resource Inventory, or a contributing structure within a historic property, historic district, or landmark under a local ordinance.  Specified environmentally sensitive, hazardous, or protected lands, such as wetlands, prime farmland, etc., as listed in Government Code section 65913.4, subdivision (a)(6)(B)- (K) as that subdivision read on September 16, 2021. These exemption areas must not be more or less restrictive than what is provided in statute.
 Parcels previously created under SB 9 lot split provisions are not eligible for further lot splits.
 Parcels adjacent to a lot created through an SB 9 lot split if that lot was split by the same owner or someone working in concert with the owner.

RECENT HCD TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE LETTERS
City of Riverside,
March 21, 2025
SB 9 requires that standards cannot be applied to SB 9 units unless they are applied uniformly to development within the underlying zone, that neighborhood noticing requirements cannot be imposed as a condition of approval for urban lot splits, and that side or rear setbacks greater than four feet cannot be imposed above the first floor for SB 9 units.

City of Fort Bragg,
February 19, 2025
SB 9 requires ministerial approval for up to two primary units and/or lot splits in single-family residential zones and outlines that local ordinances cannot impose conflicting standards.

The City of Fort Bragg's ordinance omits required references to key legal provisions, imposes restrictions not uniformly applied in single-family zones, sets overly restrictive ADU size limits, and includes site exclusion and utility
requirements that conflict with SB 9.

City of Laguna
Beach,
September 19, 2024
SB 9 requires ministerial approval of housing developments with up to two units and/or lot splits in all single-family residential zones. The ordinance improperly excluded the Residential/Hillside Protection (R/HP) zone, misapplied site exclusion criteria for fire and fault hazard zones, and incorrectly imposed an owner-occupancy requirement for SB 9 developments, which SB 9 does not allow.

Page 439 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Duplexes and Lot Splits (SB 9) April 2026 4 of 4
City of Long Beach,
August 9, 2024
Objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards shall not preclude an urban lot split from occurring. The letter also explains how a local agency can require access to new lots.

City of Menlo Park,
July 11, 2024
A local agency cannot require park dedication in-lieu fees (commonly known as Quimby fees) as a condition of
approval for SB 9 urban lot splits.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Historic Districts and
Resources
AB 1061, Quirk-Silva
(2025); amended Gov.

Code, §§ 65852.21
and 66411.7.

Clarifies exclusions and protections for historic districts and historic landmarks under SB 9. Proposed lot splits cannot result in demolition or alteration of a contributing structure in a historic district.

Strengthening SB 9
SB 450, Atkins (2024);
amended Gov. Code,
§§ 65852.21 and
66411.7, and Section 4
of Chapter 162 of the
Statutes of 2021
SB 450 strengthens and clarifies the provisions of SB 9 by limiting the regulatory authority of local governments over SB 9 projects. The bill aims to prevent cities from imposing excessive design and zoning restrictions that hinder the development of duplexes and lot splits in single-family residential zones. By standardizing approval processes and reducing regulatory barriers, SB 450 ensures that SB 9 fulfills its goal of increasing housing density across California.

Page 440 ends

Middle Class Housing Act (SB 6) April 2026 1 of 2
MIDDLE CLASS HOUSING ACT (SB 6)
Government Code § 65852.24

HOUSING LAW FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION
The Middle Class Housing Act of 2022 (Chapter 659,
Statutes of 2022), commonly referred to as “SB 6”
was signed into law on September 28, 2022. The law
aims to address California’s housing shortage by
providing that housing is an allowed use, without the
need for rezoning, on eligible commercially-zoned
sites provided that a proposed development meets
specified requirements. The statute does not create a
specific ministerial approval process but allows
project applicants to use the option to combine SB 6
with the existing Streamlined Ministerial Approval
Process (“SMAP”) available under Government Code
section 65913.4.

KEY PROVISIONS
The statute allows for residential development on commercially zoned sites where office, retail, or parking are a principally permitted use. Eligible developments must comply with site eligibility criteria and development-specific requirements. For example, a site cannot be on or adjacent to an industrial use, and a development must meet specified density and comply with local development standards and inclusionary housing requirements, if applicable. A proposed development may be either entirely residential or mixed-use with at least 50 percent of the square footage of the new construction associated with the project designated for residential use.

The statute does not automatically mandate a specific review process for applications submitted under SB 6. However, a project sponsor may utilize the streamlined process specified in Government Code section 65913.4 (“SMAP”) for a project that meets the criteria of both statutes. In addition, SB 6 projects are entitled to the protections of the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) and may utilize State Density Bonus Law (SDBL) to qualify for a density bonus, waiver, or incentive/concession.

Local Implementation
SB 6 is applicable to local jurisdictions without an implementing ordinance, although a local jurisdiction may choose to adopt a local ordinance. Local agencies have the option to exempt certain parcel(s) from SB 6. However, to do so, local agencies must show that there is no net loss in residential density from the exempted parcel(s) by making written findings supported by substantial evidence that either the lost residential density:
 Is concurrently reallocated to other parcel(s), or
 Can be accommodated on a site(s) that allows a density at or above the density specified in Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c)(3)(B) in excess of the acreage required to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of lower income housing..

The Housing Law Fact Sheets
provide an overview of existing
laws which the California
Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
has statutory authority to enforce.

Page 441 ends

California Department of Housing and Community Development Housing Law Fact Sheet Middle Class Housing Act (SB 6) April 2026 2 of 2
Middle Class Housing Act vs. Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act The Middle Class Housing Act was signed into law at the same time as the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act in Government Code sections 65400, 65585, and 65912.100, commonly referred to as “AB 2011.” Both statutes broadly create opportunities for housing on commercially zoned sites, but key differences include:
 Review process. While AB 2011 creates a streamlined ministerial process and projects are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), SB 6 does not. SB 6 on its own does not mandate a specific review process; however, it creates an option for project applicants to invoke SMAP (Government Code section 65913.4) if the developer wants to pursue a ministerial approval process.  Eligibility. SB 6 and AB 2011 each have their own set of site eligibility and development requirements. Some of these requirements are the same, while others are not. For example, both statutes provide that the site must allow office, retail, or parking use and cannot be located on or adjacent to an industrial use. Generally, AB 2011 has a more extensive list of eligibility requirements compared to SB 6—AB 2011 itself has different requirements depending on the project affordability.  Affordability. SB 6 does not establish a specific affordability requirement for eligible projects but instead defers to a local government’s inclusionary housing requirement if there is one in place. AB 2011 has a specific set of affordability requirements (one for 100 percent affordable projects and another for mixed-income) whether or not a local government has its own inclusionary housing requirements.  Labor provisions. SB 6 includes more extensive “skilled and trained workforce” requirements in addition to prevailing wage requirements. AB 2011 requires prevailing wage but does not include “skilled and trained workforce” requirements.

LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS
Expanded Housing Development
on Commercial Sites
AB 2243, Wicks (2024); amended
Gov. Code, §§ 65852.24, 65912.101,
65912.111, 65912.112, 65912.113,
65912.114, 65912.121, 65912.122,
65912.123, and 65912.124, and
added Gov. Code, § 65912.106
Amends both SB 6 and AB 2011 to broaden
the scope of residential developments
permissible in commercial zones. It allows
mixed-income projects on regional mall sites
under 100 acres and in narrower commercial
corridors and extends eligibility to projects
within 500 feet of a freeway.

Page 442 ends

Rancho Cucamonga City CouncilOctober 7, 2026

Rancho Cucamonga City Council
October 7, 2026