An act to add Article 10.5 (commencing with Section 1861.5) to Chapter 9 of Part 2 of Division 1 of the Insurance Code, relating to insurance.
AB 311 would reinstate and extend a prior California Civil Code provision that allows a tenant, with the landlord’s written approval, to temporarily house a person at risk of homelessness in the tenant’s dwelling unit, regardless of lease terms. The authorization would run until January 1, 2031, and the bill would take effect immediately as an urgency statute. The measure is framed as a housing-stability and disaster-response tool, and it expands the definition of “person at risk of homelessness” to include people displaced by a Governor-declared disaster in a disaster-stricken area.
The bill also adds detailed rules governing rent, liability, and termination. A landlord may adjust rent during the temporary occupancy, including any separately authorized pet rent if the guest has a common household pet, but the rent must revert when the guest leaves, subject to lawful intervening increases. The tenant remains responsible for full rent payment and, unless otherwise agreed, is liable for the guest’s conduct under the lease. The guest is treated as a lodger for most purposes, with specific notice and removal procedures, and the arrangement cannot violate occupancy limits or building standards. The bill does not apply to Section 8 or other federally assisted low-income housing.
The bill’s impact on state law is to restore a previously expired tenant-housing authorization in Civil Code Section 1942.8 and update it with new disaster-related coverage and pet-related provisions. It creates a temporary statutory framework for landlords, tenants, and guests that interacts with existing landlord-tenant, lodger, eviction, and rent-stabilization rules. It also preserves landlord discretion by making clear that no owner is compelled to approve the arrangement.
Overall sentiment in the available legislative history appears strongly favorable. The recorded votes were unanimous in committee and on the Assembly floor, indicating broad support and little visible opposition at those stages. The urgency clause suggests lawmakers viewed the measure as time-sensitive, particularly in light of housing shortages and disaster displacement.
The main points of potential contention are the added responsibilities for tenants and the landlord’s ability to adjust rent. The bill places legal and financial responsibility on the tenant for the temporary occupant’s conduct and requires written agreements that warn of possible lease termination if rules are violated. At the same time, it preserves landlord consent and allows rent adjustments, which may be viewed as necessary protections by landlords but as burdensome by tenant advocates. The inclusion of pets and disaster-displaced individuals broadens the policy’s reach, but the bill still excludes federally subsidized housing and does not override other household-occupancy laws.
AB 311 would add Civil Code Section 1942.8 and temporarily revive a tenant-hosting framework that had expired, allowing a tenant with landlord approval to house a person at risk of homelessness, including certain disaster-displaced individuals, through January 1, 2031. It would affect landlord-tenant relations by setting rules for written consent, rent adjustments, tenant liability, lodger-style occupancy rights, notice requirements, and removal procedures, while expressly excluding Section 8 and other federally assisted low-income housing and preserving occupancy-limit and building-code restrictions.
The available voting record shows unanimous support: the bill received a 12-0 do pass vote in committee and a 77-0 vote on the Assembly floor for the urgency measure. No committee transcript opposition is provided, and the bill’s framing around homelessness, disaster recovery, and immediate effect suggests a broadly sympathetic policy environment. Overall, the sentiment appears positive and noncontroversial at the recorded stages.
The most likely areas of contention are the balance of rights and responsibilities between tenants and landlords. Landlords may be concerned about being asked to approve additional occupants, manage rent changes, and rely on tenants to control the guest’s conduct, while tenants may be concerned about liability for another person’s actions and the possibility of lease termination if problems arise. The bill also raises practical questions about how pet rent, disaster-displaced occupants, and lodger removal procedures will operate, though the text limits the arrangement by requiring landlord approval and compliance with occupancy standards.