An act to add Section 17970.9 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to housing.
AB 1738 would require every city, including charter cities, county, and city and county to offer remote inspection options for certain building-permit inspections in single- and two-family dwellings by July 1, 2027. The bill covers a defined list of relatively routine work, including water heaters, HVAC replacements, reroofs, minor electrical and plumbing work, photovoltaic and energy storage systems, smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, many accessory dwelling unit inspections under 800 square feet, home hardening and defensible space work, and a second list of items such as drywall, siding, insulation, window replacements, light foundations and footings, decks, demolition, gas line removal, and small additions or sheds under 800 square feet. Remote inspections could be done by videoconference or by submitted photos and videos, at the inspector’s discretion, and local agencies could keep digital records for later review or training.
The bill would amend the State Housing Law and the annual housing element reporting requirements in the Government Code. It would create a new statewide mandate for local building departments to provide remote inspection services at no greater cost or delay than in-person inspections, extend existing public-entity immunities to remote inspections, and allow local agencies to conduct onsite audits and temporarily bar homeowners or contractors who willfully misrepresent work. It would also require cities and counties to report, beginning April 1, 2028, whether they have implemented remote inspection programs and to include data on remote versus in-person inspections, failure rates, and audits. The bill is framed as a matter of statewide concern and would apply to charter cities; it also declares that no state reimbursement is required.
The available voting history suggests broad committee support, with unanimous do-pass votes in both the Local Government and Appropriations committees. The bill’s findings present remote inspections as a housing-affordability and permitting-efficiency measure, emphasizing reduced delays, lower costs, and better use of inspector time. No committee transcript is available here, but the vote pattern indicates generally favorable sentiment toward the proposal.
The main policy tension is between statewide standardization and local discretion. Support for the bill appears to rest on the idea that remote inspections can speed permitting and reduce costs, while the bill still preserves inspector discretion over whether a remote inspection is appropriate for a given item and allows local agencies to decide whether to use audits and temporary bans for misrepresentation. Potential concerns are the administrative burden on local governments, the reliability of remote verification, and the bill’s mandate applying even to charter cities. The inclusion of reporting requirements and the no-reimbursement provision also reflect possible fiscal and implementation concerns for local agencies.