By: Anthony Tannehill
With major State Legislative deadlines approaching, a collection of bills restricting development related fees has halted following opposition from CSDA and other stakeholders whose members provide infrastructure needed to serve growing communities.
AB 874 (Avilia Farías), SB 315 (Grayson), and SB 677 (Wiener) reduced, delayed, or deferred fees paid by private developers to support the water, sewer, parks, fire protection, and other infrastructure built by special districts and other local agencies to support housing. Had the legislation passed, it would result in less housing, inadequate essential infrastructure, or a shifted tax burden from developers to California residents.
AB 874 (Ávila Farías) Mitigation Fee Act: waiver of fees: affordable rental housing.
The author of AB 874 has chosen not to take the bill up in policy committee in 2025, making it a “two-year bill”, meaning it will be eligible for consideration in January 2026. CSDA opposes this measure that waives all impact fees for a residential development subject to a regulatory agreement with a public entity for a term of at least 55 years in which at least 49 percent of the total units, exclusive of manager units, are reserved for occupancy by lower income households. In other words, AB 874 removes funding from essential services for the very residents these types of measures seek to house.
SB 315 (Grayson) Quimby Act.
SB 315 has also transitioned to a two-year bill. CSDA joined the California Association of Recreation and Park Districts in opposing SB 315 because of its negative impact on development related fees under the Quimby Act, which fund parks necessary for livable communities. Among other provisions, the bill would have prohibited developers’ dedications of land or fees in lieu from exceeding 25 percent of the acreage of the subdivision. It also would have prohibited Quimby Act fees within a ½ mile of an existing park. These restrictions could leave families in high-rise, urban infill developments with inadequate natural landscapes and recreational spaces essential for physical, mental, and emotional health.
SB 677 (Wiener) Housing development: streamlined approvals.
CSDA opposes SB 677 because it would exacerbate existing development related fee restrictions for local agencies, particularly in connection with residential properties built on split lots. Namely, among myriad other provisions, the bill would expand the existing fee exemption from homes less than 800 square feet built on split lots to new homes as large as 1,750 square feet. SB 677 failed passage in the Senate Housing Committee on a vote of 4-3, where it would have needed six votes to pass. It nonetheless did receive an opportunity for reconsideration and has until May 2nd to be heard, which is not anticipated at this time.
All State Legislation keyed to have a fiscal impact must pass out of the policy committees to which it has been referred no later than
Friday May 2. Those measures not keyed to have a fiscal impact must pass policy committees by the following the Friday, May 9.
The California State Legislature operates on a biennial cycle. Bills introduced in 2025 therefore may be eligible to heard again in early 2026. CSDA will continue to monitor these measures and advocate for responsible development with adequate infrastructure.
#Revenue
#ImpactFees
#PublicWorksandFacilities