Alex Lee
- Democratic
- Assemblymember
- District 24
Author
Existing law, commonly known as the Ellis Act, generally prohibits public entities from adopting any statute, ordinance, or regulation, or taking any administrative action, to compel the owner of residential real property to offer or to continue to offer accommodations, as defined, in the property for rent or lease. Existing law authorizes any public entity that has in effect any control or system of control on the price at which accommodations are offered for rent or lease to require by statute or ordinance, or by regulation, that the owner notify the entity of an intention to withdraw those accommodations from rent or lease, and to require that the notice contain specified statements. This bill would, when a public entity has a price control system in effect, prohibit an owner of accommodations from filing a notice with a public entity of an intention to withdraw accommodations or prosecuting an action to recover possession of accommodations, or threatening to do so, if not all the owners of the accommodations have been owners of record for at least 5 continuous years, with specified exceptions, or with respect to property that the owner acquired within 10 years after providing notice of an intent to withdraw accommodations at a different property for a period of 10 years from the date the new property is acquired, This bill would require an owner of accommodations notifying the public entity of an intent to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease, as provided, to identify each person or entity with an ownership interest in the accommodations, as provided. That information would be available for public inspection. The bill would prohibit an owner or any person or entity with an ownership interest from acting in concert with a coowner, successor owner, prospective owner, agent, employee, or assignee to circumvent these provisions. The bill would provide specified, nonexclusive remedies for a violation. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
Ordered to inactive file at the request of Assembly Member Lee.
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 10. Noes 4.) (May 4).
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (April 19). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (April 5). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. Read second time and amended.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H. & C.D. Read second time and amended.
From printer. May be heard in committee March 17.
Read first time. To print.
| Bill Text Versions | Format |
|---|---|
| AB2050 | HTML |
| 02/14/22 - Introduced | |
| 03/17/22 - Amended Assembly | |
| 03/28/22 - Amended Assembly | |
| 04/18/22 - Amended Assembly |
| Document | Format |
|---|---|
| 04/01/22- Assembly Housing and Community Development | |
| 04/16/22- Assembly Judiciary | |
| 05/02/22- Assembly Appropriations | |
| 05/06/22- ASSEMBLY FLOOR ANALYSIS |
Data on Open States is updated periodically throughout the day from the official website of the California State Legislature.
If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.