An act to amend Sections 714.3, 1950.6, 5850, and 5855 of, and to add Sections 1950.3 and 2924.13 to, and to repeal Section 1947.1 of, the Civil Code, to amend Sections 54221, 65584.01, 65584.04, 65589.5, 65905.5, 65913.10, 65928, 65941.1, 65953, and 65956 of, to amend and repeal Sections 65940, 65943, and 65950 of, to add Section 8590.15.5 to, and to repeal Section 66301 of, the Government Code, to amend Section 30603 of, to add Section 30342 to, and to add and repeal Section 25402.15 of, the Public Resources Code, and to amend Section 17053.5 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, relating to housing.
SB 681 is a broad housing package that would make changes across landlord-tenant law, mortgage foreclosure rules, common-interest development enforcement, local land-use and housing approval procedures, surplus land disposal, coastal permitting, seismic retrofit funding, and the state renter’s tax credit. In the rental housing area, the bill would prohibit a range of tenant fees unless specifically listed in the lease, cap late fees, bar parking-space charges, limit application screening fees to actual screening costs, and prohibit fees for pets. It would also repeal existing parking unbundling provisions and create a civil remedy for unauthorized charges.
The bill also adds a new foreclosure protection for subordinate mortgages by deeming certain debts abandoned when servicers fail to communicate or provide required notices, and by restricting nonjudicial foreclosure unless the servicer records certifications and sends notice to the borrower. For homeowners’ associations, it would cap monetary penalties at the lesser of the schedule or $100 per violation, require an opportunity to cure before discipline, and shorten the notice period for discipline decisions. It would also direct the California Residential Mitigation Program to fund seismic retrofits for affordable multifamily housing when appropriated, and would expand the renter’s tax credit to $250 or $500 for 2026-2030 if funded through the Budget Act, with a refundable component for certain years.
A major portion of the bill strengthens and extends pro-housing rules in state law. It would remove multiple sunset dates and make permanent several Housing Accountability Act, Permit Streamlining Act, and Housing Crisis Act provisions, including limits on local hearings, requirements to use objective standards in place when an application or preliminary application was submitted, faster completeness determinations, and shorter approval timelines for certain projects. It would also change regional housing need allocation rules by revising the data councils of governments must use, tightening the process when HCD rejects a draft methodology, and eliminating the option for a council to adopt a methodology without revision after an adverse HCD finding.
The bill further affects surplus land and coastal development. It would narrow exemptions for school district surplus land, expand affordable housing-related requirements for certain local agency land disposals, require the Coastal Commission to accept electronic submissions, exempt residential projects from some coastal appeal provisions, and require annual reporting on residential project appeals. It also directs the Energy Commission to study comfort-based energy-efficiency measures and report recommendations to the Legislature. Overall, the bill would significantly expand state-level controls and deadlines affecting housing production, tenant costs, and local review processes.
The general sentiment reflected in the voting history is supportive but not unanimous. The bill advanced through committee with majority support at each step, including 8-2 and 11-2 votes in April, a 5-0 suspense-file placement, a 5-1 do-pass-as-amended vote, and a 28-10 Senate third-reading vote. The lack of recorded committee testimony in the provided materials limits insight into detailed arguments, but the vote pattern suggests broad support for the bill’s pro-housing and tenant-protection goals alongside some reservations about scope, fiscal impact, and local-government constraints.
SB 681 would amend a wide range of statutes in the Civil Code, Government Code, Public Resources Code, and Revenue and Taxation Code to impose new tenant fee limits, foreclosure notice and certification requirements, HOA discipline limits, and a larger renter tax credit. It would also extend or make permanent several housing streamlining and anti-disapproval provisions in the Housing Accountability Act, Permit Streamlining Act, and Housing Crisis Act, while changing RHNA methodology rules, surplus land disposal rules, and coastal permitting procedures. The bill would impose new duties on local agencies, school districts, councils of governments, and state agencies, and the digest states it creates a state-mandated local program.
The bill appears to have generally favorable momentum in the Legislature, with repeated majority votes and a strong Senate floor vote, but not unanimous support. The committee history shows some opposition at each stage, suggesting that while the bill’s housing-production and renter-relief provisions are broadly aligned with legislative priorities, its breadth and its constraints on local discretion likely generated concern. The bill was also placed on suspense in Appropriations, indicating fiscal and implementation questions were part of the discussion.
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s limits on local control and private charges. Local governments may object to the indefinite extension of housing streamlining rules, tighter RHNA methodology requirements, reduced hearing opportunities, and the removal of some local discretion in permitting and coastal appeals. Landlords and property managers may oppose the fee caps, parking-fee ban, and screening-fee restrictions, while mortgage servicers may object to the new abandonment and foreclosure restrictions. HOA boards may also view the penalty cap and cure requirements as limiting enforcement tools. On the other hand, housing advocates and tenant groups are likely to support the bill’s affordability, anti-fee, and pro-production provisions.