An act to amend Section 798.21 of the Civil Code, relating to mobilehome parks.
Summary
AB 768 revises Civil Code Section 798.21, which governs when a mobilehome space in a mobilehome park is exempt from local rent control rules. Under current law, the exemption generally applies when the space is not the homeowner’s principal residence. This bill would replace that standard with a “permanent housing” test, applying the exemption when the space is not occupied as permanent housing for at least 30 consecutive days. The bill defines permanent housing as a residence intended to be indefinite or continuous, and excludes seasonal vacation homes and short-term rentals.
The bill also changes the process park management must follow before changing rent or other tenancy terms based on a determination that the space is not being used as permanent housing. Management would have to notify the homeowner in writing, explain the determination, and provide the documents relied upon. If the homeowner responds with a statement refuting the claim, the bill creates a rebuttable presumption in the homeowner’s favor and places the burden on management to prove the space is not being used as permanent housing. AB 768 further narrows existing exemptions so they apply only in specified situations, including when the mobilehome is actively listed for sale, when assignment or subletting is prohibited, or when ownership has been transferred through surrender or foreclosure.
Impact
AB 768 would amend Section 798.21 of the Civil Code and alter how local rent-control exemptions are applied to mobilehome spaces. It would expand procedural protections for homeowners by requiring notice, explanation, and supporting documents before management can modify rent or tenancy terms, while also making it harder for management to override a homeowner’s claim that the space is used as permanent housing. The bill would affect mobilehome park owners, park management, homeowners, tenants, brokers, and mobilehome dealers, and would likely reduce the circumstances in which local rent caps can be avoided based on nonresidency determinations.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill has generally been well received in committee and on the Assembly floor. It passed committee with a strong majority, then later passed another committee vote unanimously, and it advanced on Assembly Third Reading by a wide margin. The absence of recorded opposition in the provided transcripts, combined with the favorable votes, indicates broad support for the bill’s consumer-protection and due-process approach.
Contention
The main point of contention is the balance between homeowner protections and park management’s ability to enforce rent and tenancy rules. Supporters appear to favor the bill’s stronger presumption in favor of homeowners and its tighter limits on when rent protections can be removed. Potential critics would likely focus on the added burden on management to prove nonuse as permanent housing, the reduced flexibility to adjust rents, and the narrower exemption rules for spaces not actively held for sale. No committee transcript objections are provided, so the specific arguments against the bill are not documented in the materials supplied.
An act to add Article 6.5 (commencing with Section 798.65) to Chapter 2.5 of Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code, and to amend Section 65863.7 of the Government Code, relating to housing.
An act to amend Sections 18802 and 18804 of, and to repeal Section 18806 of, 18802, 18804, 18805, and 18806 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to housing.