December 2, 2025
TO: City Council
REQUESTED BY: Travis Randel, Deputy City Manager, Development Services APPROVED BY: Robert A. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance 25-14 - Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Find that adoption of the proposed urgency ordinance is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080.17, which expressly exempts the adoption of ordinances implementing California’s Accessory Dwelling Unit laws contained in Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code; and,
2. Waive full reading and adopt by title only an urgency ordinance entitled:
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 17.405.060 OF THE SAN
JACINTO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS TO COMPLY WITH
RECENT CHANGES IN STATE LAW, AND FINDING THE ACTION TO BE
STATUTORILY EXEMPT FROM CEQA UNDER PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE § 21080.17.
BACKGROUND:
In recent years, the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a series of bills that continue to narrow local authority to regulate Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs). On October 10, 2025, three new bills applicable to San Jacinto were signed by the Governor that further amend State ADU law:
• AB 1154 – JADU Owner-Occupancy; Short-Term Rental
• SB 9 & SB 543 – ADU Ordinance Submittal to HCD; Approval • SB 543 – ADU Size; Number of ADUs; Impact Fees; Permitting Timeline All three bills take effect January 1, 2026.
These bills impose new requirements, expand the number and type of ADUs and JADUs that must be approved, restrict local development standards, and create strict procedural timelines for reviewing and acting on ADU applications. Most notably, SB 9 and SB 543 establish severe consequences for non-compliance: any local ADU ordinance that does not comply with State law, or is not submitted to HCD within 60 days of adoption, becomes null and void. If that occurs, the City must default to the minimum statutory standards, which provide very little local control over height, setbacks, location, design, privacy, landscaping, and other key development factors.
AB 1154 – JADU Owner-Occupancy; Short-Term Rental
Under existing state law, when a Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) is created on a singlefamily residential lot, the property owner is required to reside either in the JADU or in the remaining portion of the single-family home. AB 1154 significantly narrows this long-standing owner-occupancy requirement. Beginning January 1, 2026, owner-occupancy is required only when the JADU shares sanitation facilities (a bathroom) with the primary dwelling. In other words, if the JADU has its own independent bathroom, the owner is not required to live on the property at all. This is a substantial shift in state policy and further limits the City’s ability to ensure on-site management or oversight of JADUs. (Gov. Code, § 66333(b).) AB 1154 also adds a new statewide prohibition on the use of JADUs for short-term rentals. A JADU may not be rented for fewer than 30 consecutive days. Some cities already prohibit shortterm rentals in both ADUs and JADUs, while others may not; the law now makes this restriction mandatory. This state-level prohibition is now codified in Government Code section 66333(g) and must be incorporated into the City’s ADU ordinance.
SB 9; SB 543 – ADU Ordinance Submittal to HCD; Approval Local agencies are already required to submit their ADU ordinances to HCD within 60 days of adoption. SB 9 and SB 543 add significant penalties:
• Any ADU ordinance not submitted to HCD within 60 days becomes null and void. • Any ADU ordinance found by HCD to be non-compliant becomes null and void if the City does not respond to HCD within 30 days. (Gov. Code §§ 66326(d), 66333.5(d).) A nullified ordinance leaves the City with no enforceable ADU development standards except those specifically listed in State law, which would severely limit the City’s ability to address neighborhood compatibility, privacy, parking, impacts on infrastructure, and fire safety.
SB 543 – ADU Size; Number of ADUs; Impact Fees; Permitting Timeline SB 543 makes numerous changes and clarifications to state ADU law, the most notable of which are summarized below.
ADU & JADU Size
Existing law limits the maximum size of a JADU to 500 square feet and prohibits local ADU ordinances from imposing certain development standards that would prevent an ADU created under Government Code section 66314 through 66322 from being at least 800 square feet.
SB 543 amends state ADU law to specify that allowable square footage of an ADU or JADU refers to square footage of “interior livable space.” (See amended Gov. Code, § 66313(d), 66321(b)(2).)
Impact Fees
Existing law exempts ADUS that are 750 square feet or smaller from development impacts fees (DIFs). SB 543 clarifies that DIFs may not be imposed on an ADU that has 750 or fewer square feet of interior livable space or on a JADU with 500 or fewer square feet of interior livable space. The bill also exempts an ADU or JADU with fewer than 500 square feet of interior livable space from school impact fees. (See amended Gov. Code, § 66311.5.) Quantity of ADUs Created Under Government Code Section 66323 Existing state law creates four categories of ADUs that must be approved if they comply with the limited standards provided in Government Code section 66323(a)(1)–(4). These are:
1. a converted ADU and JADU created on a lot with a proposed or existing singlefamily dwelling (Gov. Code, § 66323(a)(1));
2. a detached ADU created on a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling (Gov. Code, § 66323(a)(2));
3. converted ADUs created in an existing multifamily dwelling (Gov. Code, § 66323(a)(3)); and
4. detached ADUs created on a lot with a proposed or existing multifamily dwelling.
For some time, there has been uncertainty as to whether ADUs created under Government Code section 66323 could be combined. Some practitioners interpreted the statute to not require local agencies to allow combinations. Initially, HCD took the same position, in its 2020 ADU Handbook. But for the last few years, HCD has taken the opposite position: that yes, combinations are permitted. (See HCD January 2025 ADU Handbook, at p. 19 [“[P]ursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a), local governments must allow units created pursuant to subparagraphs (1) and (2) together or (3) and (4) together”].) SB 543 codifies HCD’s most recent interpretation by amending Government Code section 66323 to specifically allow combinations. Thus, a lot with a multifamily dwelling can now have a converted ADU or ADUs created under section 66323(a)(3) and detached ADUs created under section 66323(a)(4). And, a lot with a single family dwelling can now have a converted ADU and a JADU created under section 66323(a)(1), and a detached ADU created under section 66323(a)(2).
ADU Permitting Process
Existing law has long required local agencies to approve or deny an ADU application within 60 days of receiving a complete application. However, state law was silent with respect to incomplete determinations, subsequent resubmittals, and appealing local decisions on ADU applications.
SB 543 requires local agencies to now:
1. determine whether an ADU application is complete within 15 business days of submittal;
2. if the application is incomplete, within the same 15 days, provide the applicant with a list of incomplete items and how to address them;
3. review a resubmitted application for completeness within 15 business days;
4. provide the applicant with a written appeal process for any incomplete determination or denial (to the Planning Commission or City Council, or both); and
5. provide a final written determination on the appeal within 60 business days of receiving the appeal). (See amended Gov. Code, §§ 66317 [ADUs], 66335 [JADUs].)
State-Imposed Timelines and Loss of Local Control
The State continues to significantly restrict local authority over land use, development standards, and housing policy. These most recent ADU bills are another example of Sacramento imposing new mandates on cities while providing virtually no time for local governments to implement the required changes. All three ADU bills affecting San Jacinto were signed by the Governor on October 11, 2025, and each takes effect January 1, 2026.
To put the timeline into perspective, if the City attempted to process a standard Development Code amendment using the normal public process required by State law (Planning Commission hearing, City Council first reading, City Council second reading, 30-day waiting period), the City would have needed to begin that process three days after the Governor signed the bills. A compliant schedule would have required:
• A Planning Commission hearing no later than October 28, requiring notice to be published by October 18 and submitted to the newspaper around October 14. • A City Council public hearing and first reading by November 18, requiring notice to be published by November 8 and sent to the newspaper by November 4. • A second reading by December 2, followed by a mandatory 30-day waiting period before the ordinance could take effect.
In other words, the City would have needed to initiate a Development Code amendment process before staff had the opportunity to evaluate the bills, draft the required text, consult with counsel, or prepare findings, let alone conduct meaningful public outreach. This compressed timeline is not practical, and it is yet another instance of the State enacting major housing policy changes at the last possible moment and expecting local agencies to immediately comply.
Compounding the challenge, the consequences of failing to meet the January 1 deadline are severe. Under SB 9 and SB 543, any local ADU ordinance that is not updated and submitted to HCD within the mandated timeframe becomes null and void. If that occurs, the City would lose the ability to apply its ADU regulations entirely and would be forced to process ADUs solely under the most permissive provisions of State law, with no local control over height, setbacks, parking, design, privacy, or neighborhood compatibility. The outcome would be harmful to the character of existing neighborhoods and inconsistent with the City’s planning objectives.
Because of the extraordinarily compressed timeline created by the State, and to avoid the automatic invalidation of the City’s ADU ordinance, staff is recommending adoption of an urgency ordinance. An urgency ordinance allows the City to comply with the January 1 effective date, protects the City from losing its regulatory authority, and maintains continuity of local ADU standards. The urgency ordinance will take effect January 1, 2026. A subsequent, nonurgency ordinance will follow the full Planning Commission and City Council process as soon as feasible.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Public Resources Code § 21080.17 provides a specific statutory exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for local agency actions adopting ordinances that implement California’s Accessory Dwelling Unit law. The statute states that “[t]his division does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county to implement Section 65852.1 of, or Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code.” Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 contains the entirety of the State’s ADU and JADU requirements.
Because the proposed urgency ordinance is limited to amending the San Jacinto Municipal Code to bring the City’s ADU and JADU regulations into compliance with those State-mandated provisions, the action qualifies as a statutorily exempt project under Public Resources Code § 21080.17. Statutory exemptions are absolute and are not subject to CEQA’s exceptions analysis under CEQA Guidelines § 15300.2.
Accordingly, no further environmental review is required, and the adoption of the urgency ordinance is exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with adoption of the urgency ordinance. The revisions required by State law do not impose new local fees, mandates, or administrative processes that would result in additional City costs. ADU and JADU applications will continue to be processed under existing permitting procedures and staffing resources.
ATTACHMENTS:
Urgency Ordinance No. 25-14
Exhibit "A"