An act to amend Sections 65583, 65583.1, and 65583.2 of, and to add Section 65583.01 to, the Government Code, relating to land use.
AB 906 revises California’s housing element law to strengthen how cities and counties plan for housing sites and fair housing outcomes. The bill would require local governments to complete a fair housing assessment at least one year before the next housing element deadline, make that draft assessment public for at least 90 days, and incorporate the assessment and related strategies into the first draft of the housing element. It also requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to create a standardized format for reporting fair housing strategies and actions, including timelines, responsible parties, resources, intended impacts, and the specific fair housing priority being addressed.
The bill also changes how jurisdictions identify and distribute housing sites. It would require housing element site inventories and related programs to ensure that sites are distributed throughout the jurisdiction in a way that affirmatively furthers fair housing and reduces residential segregation. If a jurisdiction’s inventory does not meet that standard, the bill requires additional rezoning and site identification steps. HCD would be required to publish an online tool by April 1, 2027, to determine whether a jurisdiction’s site distribution complies, and could grant adjustments where the tool is unreliable because of local data limitations.
AB 906 would amend Government Code Sections 65583, 65583.1, and 65583.2 and add new Section 65583.01, expanding the procedural and substantive requirements for housing elements statewide. It would impose new duties on cities and counties to conduct and publish fair housing assessments, to document public outreach and meaningful consultation, to use HCD’s standardized reporting format, and to ensure that housing sites are distributed in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing. The bill also tightens rules for counting accessory dwelling units toward lower-income site inventory and requires recorded deed restrictions for those units to count in certain circumstances. Because it adds obligations on local governments, the bill declares itself a state-mandated local program and applies to charter cities as a matter of statewide concern.
The bill appears to have had generally favorable support in the Assembly and policy committees, with multiple do-pass votes and a strong Assembly floor vote of 56-13. The committee history suggests the measure was viewed as a significant housing and fair housing policy bill rather than a narrow technical change. At the same time, the fact that the Senate hearing was canceled at the request of the author indicates the bill did not complete the full legislative process in the available record, which may reflect unresolved concerns, timing issues, or a strategic pause rather than outright opposition.
The main points of contention are likely the bill’s added obligations on local governments and the new statewide standard for evaluating whether housing sites are distributed fairly across a jurisdiction. Local agencies may object to the administrative burden, the potential for more rezoning, and the use of an HCD online tool to judge compliance. Another likely area of debate is the bill’s treatment of accessory dwelling units, including the requirement for recorded deed restrictions to count them toward lower-income site capacity. Supporters would likely emphasize stronger fair housing enforcement, better site distribution, and more accountability in housing element planning, while critics would likely focus on local control, feasibility, and implementation complexity.