There’s more to housing bills this year than CEQA changes. Here’s what cities need to know

By Brady Guertin, legislative advocate (housing), and Arthur Goncalves, 2025 Ronald O. Loveridge Summer Fellow

Changes to California's landmark environmental law, especially around housing development, were the center of attention these last few weeks at the Legislature. But those bills are just a handful of the several dozen housing-related measures brought forth this year. Here are the biggest remaining bills - and a few wins - for city leaders.

Local voices prove critical in SB 79 fight

By far the most consequential remaining bill for many cities is SB 79 (Wiener). Amended 11 times so far, the bill would require cities to approve tall, dense residential housing near specific transit stops without public engagement, environmental review, or consideration for state-certified housing elements - or a guarantee of affordable housing. The measure would also allow transit agencies to establish development standards on land they own or have a permanent operating easement on for projects proposed within a half mile of a transit stop, which cities would then need to adopt.

Although the intent is laudable, Cal Cities opposes the measure. Nearly 170 city officials have sent in letters opposing the measure, with many highlighting how the bill would erode existing local efforts to promote and support transit-oriented development.

"SB 79 undermines years of responsible planning and imposes dense high-rise projects without evaluating our capacity to support them," said Brenda Olmos, vice mayor of Paramount, during a recent hearing. The city is in one of the densest regions of California.

"By forcing cities to revisit and redo already approved housing elements, it imposes unnecessary costs and delays and undermines public trust in the planning process," noted Azusa Mayor Robert Gonzales in that same hearing. The city has added hundreds of new units and thousands of feet of commercial space to areas around transit in recent years.

The measure must clear the Assembly Appropriations Committee before moving on to what will likely be a close floor vote.

Changes to the housing element process and affordable housing bond up for consideration

In the coming weeks, lawmakers are set to vote on two other critical measures. The Cal Cities-sponsored AB 650 (Papan) would improve the housing element review process by allowing cities to begin their housing element drafts earlier than existing law and provide more clarity in the review process.

Roughly 25 cities showed up in support of the bill during the City Leaders Summit this year; nearly 60 have submitted letters in support. Driven by the commitment of Cal Cities members, the bill has received bipartisan support and sailed through with zero no votes thus far.

Cal Cities is also supporting another attempt by Asm. Buffy Wicks to place a $10 billion affordable housing bond on the ballot. If approved by voters, AB 736 would provide funding for some of the state's most effective affordable housing programs used by cities, such as the Multifamily Housing Program and Infill Infrastructure Grant Program.

Cal Cities secures major changes to other housing measures

Cal Cities has worked with lawmakers to refine several bills that would have significantly impacted local land use authority. Cal Cities secured amendments that ensure cities can still require parking for some development projects, provide implementable planning and land use policies, and make clear that projects must follow local general plan and zoning requirements. These changes allowed Cal Cities to move to neutral on many bills, including AB 1154 (Carrillo), AB 610 (Alvarez), and SB 484 (Laird).

At Cal Cities' urging, lawmakers have also turned four measures into two-year bills. Cal Cities is working with the authors' office to address cities' concerns ahead of their resurfacing next year. These include:

• AB 647 (González), which would have forced cities to approve up to eight housing units on a single-family lot, so long as one of the developments is affordable, without any environmental review or public input.
• SB 677 (Wiener), which would have drastically expanded the density and size of SB 9 (Atkins, 2021) projects in single-family zones by increasing the size limit and prohibiting local agencies from collecting impact fees on SB 9 projects.
• AB 1294 (Haney), which would have required the Department of Housing and Community Development to develop a standardized entitlement application that cities must accept for residential development. It also limited the amount of information cities could collect to approve a project.
• AB 956 (Quirk-Silva), which would have required cities to approve two detached accessory dwelling units on any residential or mixed-use lot through a ministerial process.

What's next?

Lawmakers return to the Capitol on Aug. 18. They then have until Aug. 29 to get any remaining bills through their final committee hurdles and onto the floor for a final vote.