An act to add Section 76013 to the Education Code, relating to public postsecondary education.
AB 90 would require each community college district in California to adopt a plan, as part of its campus safety planning, to offer an overnight parking program for eligible students. The bill is aimed at students experiencing housing insecurity and would allow approved students to sleep overnight in designated campus parking lots and spaces. Each plan would have to be developed with campus basic needs coordinators and campus security, and would include rules for monitoring, application and permit procedures, bathroom and shower access, operating hours, conduct standards, and an estimate of implementation costs.
The bill also sets deadlines and implementation triggers. By September 1, 2026, districts must adopt the plan, and by December 31, 2026, governing boards must vote on whether to establish the program. If a board votes no, it must vote again annually until it approves the program. Students would receive free overnight parking permits valid for at least four weeks and no longer than one semester or the quarterly equivalent, and campuses would be required to keep students informed about housing services through email, orientation, and a website housing tab. The bill further requires campuses to prioritize connecting participating students to more stable housing alternatives.
AB 90 would add Section 76013 to the Education Code and create new duties for community college districts and campus basic needs coordinators. It would require districts to plan for and potentially operate overnight parking programs, designate parking areas and support facilities, establish conduct and safety procedures, and collect and report data on participation and student outcomes. The bill also provides limited civil liability protection for campuses that comply with the statute, except in cases of gross negligence, intentional misconduct, or other legal violations. Because it imposes new local duties, it is designated a state-mandated local program and could require state reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates so determines.
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in the legislative process, as reflected by repeated committee approvals and a majority vote on the Assembly floor. The concept is framed as a housing-support measure for students facing insecurity, and the bill’s structure suggests an effort to balance access with safety, oversight, and reporting. At the same time, it was ultimately held under submission in committee, indicating that fiscal, operational, or legal concerns remained significant enough to stall further progress.
The main points of contention appear to be implementation burden, cost, and liability. Community college districts would need to identify parking areas, provide monitoring and facilities, develop applications and rules, and track data, all of which could create local costs and administrative work. The bill’s liability limitation may also have drawn scrutiny because it shields campuses from certain negligence claims while expressly preserving liability for gross negligence and intentional misconduct. Another likely area of debate is whether overnight parking is an adequate or appropriate response to student homelessness, versus a stopgap measure that may normalize housing insecurity rather than solve it.