Housing

LOS ANGELES — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the creation of the first-of-its-kind Affordability Response Team within the California Department of Justice (DOJ). The Affordability Response Team will draw on the knowledge of experts from sections across the department, working together to find, investigate, and go after individuals and corporations deploying unlawful practices that are making life unaffordable for the people of California.

“Californians, we hear you: The cost of living is much too high. For many people in our state the cost of a week off work, a set of new tires, or a trip to the grocery store — let alone a mortgage or a visit to the emergency room — are not within reach,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Today, I am proud to announce the launch of my office’s Affordability Response Team. Comprised of legal experts from across DOJ, the Affordability Response Team will work to investigate and go after practices that are unlawfully raising costs. It will create a pipeline to tackle affordability from all angles — whether it be unlawful behavior by corporations, landlords, scammers, or policies that are driving up prices. Hardworking Californians deserve fair prices, deserve the ability to make enough to meet their basic needs — and also deserve to have the experiences, vacations, and joys that make life richer.”

Californians are facing an affordability crisis of epic proportion — and many cannot see a light at the end of the tunnel. Housing shortages, skyrocketing grocery prices, rising healthcare and childcare costs, predatory corporate behavior, and the federal government’s unstable economic policies are all making it difficult not only to cover the basics, but to enjoy many of the things hardworking Americans should be able to afford — like a family vacation or a dinner out. The affordability crisis disproportionately impacts low-income households, communities of color, individuals with disabilities, and young adults. In fact, 23% of California’s young adults ages 18–24 live in poverty. And seven in 10 Californians feel that healthcare expenses place a financial strain on their household.

Because these challenges are entrenched and complex, tackling the affordability crisis requires creative thinking and a willingness to attack the problem from all angles. As the top law enforcement officer of California, Attorney General Bonta has been engaged in work that goes after illegal conduct contributing to rising costs. The creation of the Affordability Response Team will amplify DOJ’s ongoing focus on affordability, to allow this work to continue, create a pipeline for continued enforcement, and signal to bad actors that California is zeroed in on this.

THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS 

Americans across the country are feeling squeezed by a wall of rising costs.

Already high food prices are predicted to increase by 3.4% over the next year and a growing number of people are skipping meals or relying on food banks because of rising food costs. Utility prices and gas prices have also increased, at the same time, wages have stagnated or declined for many workers. Since 1970’s, wages for the bottom 90% of earners have increased 44%, while wages for the top 1% of earners have risen more than 180%. More Americans are taking on debt because of the rising cost of necessities. Credit card debt in the U.S. by the end of 2025 hit a record of $1.28 trillion — and in the first quarter of this year, the percentage of credit-card balances that were at least 90 days delinquent rose to 13.12%, the highest level in 15 years.

Not all Americans are feeling the squeeze. As most households are trying to figure out how the numbers are supposed to add up for life in America, demand for luxury yachts and private jets is surging. The top 1% of Americans held 32% of America’s wealth and CEO compensation increased by almost 6% to $17.7 million as company boards rewarded their top executives for bigger profits. President Trump has said he doesn’t think about Americans financial situation and his Administration is walking the talk by exacerbating the affordability crisis with its polices. Policies like rolling back antitrust enforcement that holds large corporations accountable, pursuing international policy that leaves consumers feeling pain at the pump, prioritizing tax cuts for wealthier Americans, levying an illegal regime of tariffs, and destroying the agency responsible for protecting Americans from exploitation by big businesses who aren’t playing by the rules. All the while, the President and his own family are profiting wildly from holding public office.

FOCUS AREAS 

The Affordability Response Team will deploy DOJ's tools in these areas:

Keeping the Household Running: Grocery, Gas, and Utility Costs

From cable bills to grocery runs, the household bills Californians grapple with every month seem to be endlessly going up.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Secures End of Unlawful Meat Price Coordination, Announces Settlement with Agri Stats
• April 2026: Naming Names: Attorney General Bonta Secures Public Access to Evidence in Amazon Price Fixing Case

A Roof Over Your Head: Housing & Insurance Costs

Confronting California’s housing shortage, unlawful landlord behavior, and rising home insurance costs.

Affordability in Action:

• February 2026: Attorney General Bonta Announces Settlement with Redding Property Management Company for Violating Tenant Protection Act
• November 2025: Attorney General Bonta Announces $7 Million Settlement with Greystar for Participating in an Algorithmic Rent Alignment Scheme

Relief from Sickening Healthcare Costs

Tackling consolidation in the healthcare industry and the rising costs associated with going to the doctor and paying for prescriptions, so that all Californians can afford the care they need to be well.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Conditionally Approves Proposed Transaction to Ensure Continued Access to Senior Care Services in Fresno County
• March 2026: Attorney General Bonta Opposes Trump Administration’s Proposed Expansion of Catastrophic Health Insurance Plans 

Investing in Our Future: Childcare, Education, & Retirement

Ensuring Californians can care for their families, pursue a livelihood, invest in their future, and plan for every stage of their lives.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Opposes Plan to Weaken Federal Protections for Retirement Investments
• February 2026: Attorney General Bonta Defeats Trump Administration in Court Again, Continues Protecting Over $10 Billion in Child Care and Family Assistance Funding

All Work and Harder to Play: The High Cost of Enjoying Life

From planning a vacation to seeing your favorite band in concert, the joys of life are getting harder and harder to afford. The Affordability Response Team is tackling hidden fees and going after corporate practices hiking up prices for entertainment, tech, and trips.

Affordability in Action:

• April 2026: Attorney General Bonta Celebrates Historic Verdict in Live Nation/Ticketmaster Trial
• July 2024: Attorney General Bonta to Consumers: This Summer, Enjoy California — Without the Hidden Fees

Financial Protection: Protecting Your Hard-Earned Money

Protecting Californians by going after shady practices by big banks, lenders, and policies that unfairly penalize consumers and leave them worse off.

Affordability in Action:

• January 2026: Attorney General Bonta Helps Secure $425 Million Capital One Settlement
• January 2026: We're Going to Need a Bigger Boat: Attorney General Bonta Continues Championing Legislation to Protect California Veterans Against Claim Sharks, Financial Exploitation

Earning Less: Labor, Wages, and the Cost of Doing Business

Championing workers’ rights and maintaining a vibrant, profitable economy go hand in hand.

 Affordability in Action:

• March 2026: Attorney General Bonta Urges Congress to Fix Trump’s Tariff Mess, Refund Americans
• July 2025: Attorney General Bonta Announces Nearly $2 Million Settlement with Janitorial Franchising Companies Barring Use of Franchising to Misclassify Workers

Scams, Scams, Scams!

From social media investment scams to job scams and robocalls, cracking down and sounding the alarm on conduct preying on consumers’ pocketbooks.

Affordability in Action:

• April 2026: All That Glitters isn’t Gold: Attorney General Bonta Warns Californians of LA 2028 Olympic Games Ticket Scams
• August 2025: The Robocall Task Force Strikes Again! Attorney General Bonta Launches Operation Robocall Roundup

Click here to learn more about DOJ’s Recent Affordability Work.

RESOURCES — You Tell Us, What Corporations or Practices Should We Know About?

Housing: The Housing Justice Team reminds Californians that they can send complaints or tips related to housing to oag.ca.gov/report. Tenants who need legal help can find legal aid resources in their area at www.LawHelpCA.org.

Antitrust: Antitrust laws and their enforcement help protect consumers by ensuring businesses compete fairly, which often results in lower prices, higher quality goods, and more innovative products. Use DOJ’s Antitrust Complaint Form to report anticompetitive conduct — like price fixing, collusion, or monopolization concerns — that potentially violate the antitrust laws.

Consumer/Business/Healthcare: If you have a complaint about a business who is not complying with consumer protection or other laws, consumers can visit DOJ’s reporting page to submit a complaint.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced a $4.6 million settlement with Select Portfolio Servicing (SPS), a large sub-prime mortgage servicer operating in California, resolving allegations that the company violated state and federal mortgage servicing and debt collection laws during the COVID-19 pandemic. Today’s settlement includes enforcement of California’s Homeowner Bill of Rights (HBOR), a set of laws that provide protections to homeowners who are facing foreclosure. Under the settlement, subject to court approval, SPS must pay $1.6 million in civil penalties and $3 million in consumer relief, and must implement changes to ensure, among other things, that homeowners receive adequate support and accurate information when seeking loan modifications and other foreclosure-prevention alternatives. 

“Californians are facing a crisis of affordability, and many of our residents struggle every month to keep a roof over their heads. Our state recognized this when it passed strong debt collection and mortgage servicing laws designed to give homeowners a meaningful opportunity to avoid losing their homes amid rough financial patches — patches like the one brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My office's settlement with Select Portfolio Servicing resolves our investigation into the company, which found that the mortgage servicer violated these laws amid the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in struggling homeowners not having clarity or accurate information at a time of chaos and financial uncertainty. As part of the settlement, we are proud to secure $3 million that goes right back into the pockets of thousands of impacted homeowners.”

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, families across California faced difficulty affording rent and mortgage payments, including as a result of layoffs and reduced working hours. In 2021, Attorney General Bonta issued a consumer alert reminding California’s tenants and homeowners of their rights and protections amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

The California Department of Justice’s investigation into SPS, based in part on information provided by Housing and Economic Rights Advocates and California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., found, among other things, that the company:

• Failed to give homeowners adequate information about COVID-19 forbearance plans, including related to their forbearance exit options and their ability to apply for other loss mitigation options while in forbearance.
• Sent mortgage statements to borrowers on COVID-19 forbearance plans wrongly stating that late fees would be charged for missed payments.
• Failed to have tailored loss mitigation discussions with homeowners nearing the end of their COVID-19 forbearance plans.
• Failed to ensure that homeowners seeking foreclosure prevention alternatives received adequate support from the single points of contact SPS was required to provide under HBOR. 
• Failed to ensure that homeowners could submit loan modification applications according to the timelines and under the circumstances that HBOR allows.

Homeowners eligible to receive restitution from this settlement have already been identified and will receive payment automatically.

What is the California’s Homeowner Bill of Rights?

California’s HBOR provides protections to homeowners facing foreclosure and tenants in foreclosed homes and puts certain responsibilities on mortgage servicers. Key provisions include:

• Notification of Foreclosure-Prevention Options: Your mortgage servicer must try to contact you at least 30 days before starting the foreclosure process to discuss your financial situation and explore your options to avoid foreclosure. Within five days of recording a notice of default, your servicer must generally give you information about options to avoid foreclosure that may be available.
• Acknowledgment of Application: If you apply for a loan modification, your servicer must notify you within five business days of any missing information, other errors, and deadlines for completing your application.
• Guaranteed Single Point of Contact: If you ask for a loan modification or other foreclosure-prevention alternative, your servicer must assign you a specific person or team who can walk you through application requirements and deadlines, knows the facts and status of your application, including missing documents needed to complete your application, and can get you a decision on your application.
• Restrictions on Dual Tracking: Your servicer must generally pause the foreclosure process while it is making a decision on your completed loan-modification application and until after it gives you time to appeal a denial. It also cannot foreclose on you while you are complying with the terms of an approved loan modification, forbearance, repayment plan, or other foreclosure-prevention option.
• Tenant Rights: Purchasers of foreclosed homes must give tenants at least 90 days before starting eviction proceedings. If the tenant has a fixed-term lease that was entered into before the foreclosure sale, the new owner must honor the lease unless certain exceptions apply.

For more information about the Homeowner Bill of Rights, please visit https://oag.ca.gov/hbor. The Housing Justice Team reminds Californians that they can report complaints related to housing to oag.ca.gov/report. Tenants who need legal help can find legal aid resources in their area at www.LawHelpCA.org. 

Alert reminds local governments that California fair housing laws protecting residents with disabilities remain fully in effect following Ninth Circuit ruling

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, alongside the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Civil Rights Department (CRD), issued a legal alert reaffirming that California law continues to provide strong antidiscrimination protections for group homes serving people with disabilities following a 2025 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa. The alert advises local governments that HCD’s 2022 guidance on fair housing and land use law remains in effect. California law not only prohibits discrimination against group homes but also requires local governments to affirmatively further fair housing and support housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. The alert warns that local governments relying on the Ohio House decision to adopt or enforce restrictive zoning policies targeting group homes could face liability under California law. 

“California law protects the right of people with disabilities to live in inclusive, community-based housing,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Today, we’re making clear that local governments cannot use a narrow federal court decision as justification to undermine those expansive protections or exclude vulnerable Californians from their communities. State courts — not federal courts — have the final say on what California law means.” 

“We are grateful to have our partners in the enforcement of California housing law join us in reaffirming there is no place for discrimination against people with disabilities in our state,” said HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez. “To the contrary, local governments have a legal — and moral — obligation to ensure fair housing opportunity for our most vulnerable residents.” 

“California’s civil rights laws are clear that people with disabilities and the organizations that help house them are entitled to reasonable accommodations,” said CRD Director Kevin Kish. “Local governments must comply with state antidiscrimination protections when they serve their constituents, including the vulnerable populations who need the housing environments available in group homes. Local laws, policies, and practices that deny that housing have no place in the Golden State.” 

“Group homes” are homes where unrelated people with disabilities live together and receive peer and other disability-related support, while sharing spaces like kitchens and living areas and participating in daily communal life. Group homes help their residents live in deinstitutionalized settings and integrate into local communities. 

In Ohio House, the Ninth Circuit upheld certain group home regulations adopted by the City of Costa Mesa and rejected plaintiffs’ state and federal claims alleging that the regulations discriminated against persons with disabilities. Since the court declined to fully analyze California’s broader housing and anti-discrimination laws — including the Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law, Housing Element Law, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Law, and critical aspects of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act — the legal alert clarifies the scope and nature of these state laws. 

The legal alert further emphasizes that California state courts — not federal courts — are the final arbiters of California law, and that federal law does not prevent California from providing greater protections for residents with disabilities. The alert cites longstanding California court decisions broadly interpreting state fair housing protections and warns that restrictive local policies targeting group homes may violate state law and jeopardize local jurisdictions’ housing element compliance certifications or Prohousing Designation status.

Settlement reached ahead of scheduled trial 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today secured a settlement holding Florida-based MV Realty, its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), and its Chief Operating Officer (COO) accountable for operating a predatory scheme that provided immediate cash payments to financially vulnerable homeowners in exchange for the exclusive right to be their listing agent if they ever sold their homes in the next 40 years. The company misled consumers about the terms of these homeowner agreements and deceptively recorded liens on their homes, which prevented homeowners and their successors from transferring their home unless they paid MV Realty tens of thousands of dollars in so-called “early termination fees.” The liens could also impede homeowners from refinancing their homes or getting home equity loans. The settlement requires MV Realty to individually terminate all its liens, pay back homeowners who paid early termination fees, and void its homeowner agreements. It also imposes significant financial penalties and restrictions on its future business activities in California.

“We will not tolerate predatory conduct that targets vulnerable Californians and puts their homes at risk,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “This settlement delivers the relief we sought in our lawsuit, including full restitution for consumers and the complete undoing of the unlawful practices at issue. At a time when Californians are facing an affordability crisis, exploitation like this only adds pressure on households struggling to make ends meet — and it is unacceptable.”

MV Realty began actively operating in California in early 2022. Today’s settlement resolves the lawsuit filed against MV Realty by Attorney General Bonta and the Santa Barbara County and Napa County District Attorneys’ Offices in December 2023. In September 2024, they secured a preliminary injunction against MV Realty, which was upheld on appeal in December 2025, requiring the company to terminate its liens. Trial was scheduled to begin on June 10, 2026 in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

“MV Realty placed profits ahead of people by taking advantage of struggling homeowners and locking them into decades-long agreements by employing deceptive and unlawful business practices,” said Napa County District Attorney Allison Haley. “It was a privilege to work with our colleagues at the Attorney General’s Office and the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office in obtaining a settlement that holds MV Realty accountable, provides meaningful relief to impacted homeowners, and reinforces that California will take action against predatory practices that exploit the financially vulnerable.”

“The Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office was proud to team with the Attorney General’s Office and the Napa County DA’s Office in getting relief for Californians who were victimized by a predatory scheme that took advantage of people who were already struggling financially,” said Santa Barbara County District Attorney John T. Savrnoch. “Californians have a right to expect that when they contract with a real estate company that the company will act in their best interests.  This settlement provides an example of how California authorities will respond when a company fails in its duties to its customers by trying to take advantage of them through a predatory and unfair scheme.”

As a result of the settlement:

• All homeowner contracts are void.
• MV Realty must individually terminate all liens.
• MV Realty, its CEO, and its COO are prohibited from engaging in any business in California that requires a real estate license for 5 years.
• MV Realty must pay full restitution to consumers, totaling over $1.3 million as well as nearly $1.2 million in civil penalties, for a total monetary judgment of $2.5 million.

A number of states, including California, have passed legislation prohibiting fraudulent schemes like the one MV Realty engaged in. In October 2023, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law AB 1345, which went into effect on January 1, 2024. Sponsored by Attorney General Bonta, AB 1345 imposes a two-year limit on residential exclusive listing agreements and clarifies that these agreements cannot be filed with a county recorder.

In September 2023, MV Realty filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. The court dismissed the bankruptcy in May 2024.

State court orders Huntington Beach to pay civil penalties of at least $160,000, escalating to $50,000 per month starting this June 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom today issued the following statements after the San Diego Superior Court imposed civil penalties on the City of Huntington Beach in the amount of $160,000, followed by $50,000 per month beginning June 2026, until the City cures its violation of California’s Housing Element law. Under the Housing Element Law, every city and county in California must periodically update its housing plan to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) or share of the regional and statewide housing needs. Today’s penalties stem from a 2023 lawsuit filed by the State against Huntington Beach.  

“Huntington Beach has obstinately and illegally refused to do its part to address our state’s housing crisis, and today, it’s paying for it," said Attorney General Rob Bonta. "This civil penalty is a costly lesson for Huntington Beach that drives home the truth we've known all along: No city is above the law. Huntington Beach must stop wasting public funds and avoiding its responsibilities to the public. We expect Huntington Beach to heed the court order and finally step up to serve its residents. At the California Department of Justice, we will continue to do our part to uphold the law and fight for affordable housing for all Californians.”

“Huntington Beach officials are failing their community by wasting time and vast sums of taxpayer dollars to defend clearly unlawful NIMBY policies and fight against affordability,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. "Citizens in this community should be appalled by their city leaders’ actions here which will cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties, with more growing each month. No more excuses — every city must follow state law and do its part to build more housing.”

On March 9, 2023, Attorney General Bonta, Governor Newsom, and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Gustavo Velasquez filed a lawsuit in state court against Huntington Beach for failing to timely adopt a compliant housing element. On December 19, 2025, the State secured a decision from the San Diego Superior Court requiring the City of Huntington Beach to, among other things, adopt a housing element within 120 days and restricting the City’s land use authority, effective immediately, until that requirement is satisfied.

Now, with Huntington Beach more than 4.5 years behind schedule, the Court has ordered the city to pay $10,000 per month for each month since January 2025, totaling $160,000. Penalties will then increase to $50,000 a month beginning in June 2026, until the city cures its violations of state housing law. These penalties are consistent with Senate Bill (SB) 1037 (Weiner, 2024) which was sponsored by Attorney General Bonta and enhanced the Attorney General’s ability to seek civil penalties in court against local governments that violate state housing law.

In response to the State’s lawsuit, the City of Huntington Beach filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of certain California housing laws. The City’s lawsuit was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s dismissal, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit then denied the City’s petition for rehearing en banc. The City asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the aforementioned rulings, and that request was also denied.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today issued the following statement after the Trump Administration dropped its appeal of a court decision upholding a preliminary injunction that blocked funding restrictions the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) attempted to place on its Continuum of Care (CoC) grant program. CoC is the federal government’s flagship program for funding affordable housing and other services for individuals at risk of and experiencing homelessness. As part of a coalition of 19 attorneys general and two governors, Attorney General Bonta sued the Trump Administration in November 2025 over the planned funding restrictions and secured a preliminary injunction from the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island blocking those changes. In February 2026, the Trump Administration filed a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, which the District Court denied. The Trump Administration appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which earlier this month, rejected HUD’s request to temporarily allow the restrictions to go into effect.

“We continue to fight for Californians and the rule of law, and we continue to win. HUD’s unlawful funding restrictions have been rejected by the courts, and because the Trump Administration has now dropped its appeal, our preliminary injunction remains in effect while the case proceeds to summary judgment,” said Attorney General Bonta. “People experiencing housing insecurity or homelessness need the federal government’s continued support — not a rollback of assistance. We will continue to closely monitor the Administration’s actions, seek accountability when the law is not followed, and litigate this case to the very end.”

Among other things, HUD has tried to dramatically reduce the amount of grant funds that could be spent on permanent housing and to penalize housing providers for recognizing gender identity and diversity. HUD has also attempted to disadvantage programs that address mental disabilities and substance use disorders. These conditions went against the explicit intent of Congress and HUD’s previous guidance.

Hollister to update housing plan by June 19, 2026 for development of 4,163 additional housing units

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Gustavo Velasquez today announced a settlement that will bring the City of Hollister into compliance with the state’s Housing Element Law. Home to more than 45,000 people, Hollister is located in Central California's San Benito County. The agreement, which is in the form of a stipulated judgment and must be approved by the court, is related to California’s sixth “housing element update cycle” for the 2021-2029 time period and holds the City to a binding timeline for compliance, with clear legal and financial consequences for any further delays. 

Under the state’s Housing Element Law, every city and county in California must periodically update its housing plan to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), or share of the regional and statewide housing needs. Hollister submitted an initial draft housing element in March 2024, despite its statutory deadline of December 15, 2023. Over the next two years, and multiple rounds of feedback from HCD, Hollister failed to adopt a substantially compliant housing element and failed to complete necessary rezoning in accordance with the Housing Element Law.

“We appreciate that Hollister has agreed to a settlement that will bring it into compliance with our state’s Housing Element Law on an expeditious timeline. This reflects a commitment to making California a more affordable place for all,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “When cities fail to plan for housing, they are really just planning for rising costs, longer commutes, and increased pressure on families struggling to find a place to call home. Governor Newsom, HCD Director Velasquez, and I will continue to hold local governments accountable when they do not take steps to build their fair share of housing.”

“No city is exempt from following state housing law — and Californians do not have the time to wait as cities drag their feet,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “I am glad that Hollister has come to agreement and will begin providing their community with the housing access it needs and deserves.” 

“Planning for housing development is essential to addressing California’s ongoing crises of housing affordability and homelessness,” said HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez. “Through this action, HCD is reaffirming its partnership with the City of Hollister to ensure the community is urgently planning for and meeting the housing needs of its residents.” 

Among other things, a compliant housing element must include an assessment of housing needs, an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to meeting those needs, and a program to implement the policies, goals, and objectives of the housing element. Once the housing element is adopted, it is implemented through zoning ordinances and other actions that put its objectives into effect and facilitate the construction of new homes for Californians at all income levels.   

The housing element is a crucial tool for building housing for moderate-, low-, and very low-income Californians and redressing historical redlining and disinvestment. State income limits for what constitutes moderate-, low-, and very low-income Californians vary by county and can be found here. In San Benito County, the median income for a one-person household is $98,150. A one-person household that earns less than $74,900 is defined as low-income, and a one-person household that earns less than $46,800 is defined as very-low income.  

Under the settlement:

• The City will hold a Council meeting by April 20, 2026, to adopt a compliant housing element and will adopt all of its rezoning documents by May 4, 2026. The City will be in compliance with the Housing Element Law by June 19, 2026.
• The City is required to establish a housing trust fund and deposit $300,000 to support housing for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households, including migrant, emergency, supportive, single-room occupancy, and transitional housing. Any funds remaining in the trust fund five years after the date of deposit must be transferred to the State Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund.
• The City must notify HCD of any preliminary housing development application it receives for the remainder of the sixth cycle.
• The City must make factual findings, whenever it disapproves a housing development application, that the disapproval is not materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing — also for the remainder of the sixth cycle.
• The City agrees that, until the seventh cycle housing element is adopted and certified, the sixth cycle housing element controls in the event of any conflict with other elements, including those adopted later.

A copy of the petition and proposed judgment, which details the settlement terms, can be found here and here, respectively.

HUD guidance eviscerates enforcement of fair housing laws 

OAKLAND — Co-leading a coalition of 16 attorneys general, California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) over guidance it issued that significantly weakens fair housing protections and makes it harder to hold landlords accountable for discrimination. The Fair Housing Act (FHA), a federal law, prohibits discrimination based on seven protected traits: (1) race, (2) color, (3) national origin, (4) religion, (5) sex, (6) familial status, (7) disability. Critically, the FHA establishes a floor — not a ceiling — for protection against housing discrimination, meaning that states can expand the scope of protections beyond what the FHA mandates. Many states have chosen to do so. For example, California also provides fair housing protections for traits such as gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, source of income, and veteran or military status. HUD generally refers housing discrimination complaints to state and local agencies for potential action. However, HUD issued guidance in September 2025 threatening to decertify those agencies — thereby cutting off complaint referrals and funding — if they consider protections other than those required by the FHA, while simultaneously imposing new unlawful funding conditions. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the lawsuit by the attorneys general alleges that the guidance violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the U.S. Constitution and threatens to dismantle a crucial mechanism for combating housing discrimination. They ask the court to halt the Trump Administration’s implementation of the guidance.

“All levels of government — local, state, and federal — should be laser focused not only on building more housing, but also ensuring that everyone can access a home free from discrimination. Unfortunately, the Trump Administration thinks otherwise. HUD, without legal authority, is effectively undermining state laws that offer stronger protections than federal law,” said Attorney General Bonta. “My fellow attorneys general and I are united in our answer: not on our watch. HUD’s guidance is unlawful and would only roll back the progress we’ve made to keep our families safe from discrimination that limits where they can live.”

Congress enacted the FHA in 1968 to address the pervasive nationwide problem of housing discrimination and tasked HUD with enforcing this landmark civil rights law. Recognizing the scope of the challenge, Congress envisioned a strong partnership between HUD and state and local agencies. This partnership has operated for decades through the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP). Through the FHAP, HUD funds state and local agencies whose fair housing laws are substantially equivalent to — that is, provide at least the same protections as — the FHA, and refers housing discrimination complaints to them. State and local agencies use FHAP funds to process housing discrimination complaints, train staff, and engage in community outreach and education.

In addition to requiring state and local agencies to weaken their fair housing laws, the HUD guidance at issue establishes a number of conditions that they must meet to qualify for FHAP funding, including:

• Disparate impact condition. HUD’s guidance prohibits state and local agencies from pursuing claims premised on disparate impact liability, even where state law expressly recognizes disparate impact as a cognizable theory of liability. Disparate impact liability prohibits discrimination based on the effects of a housing policy, even if the intent of the policy was not to discriminate.
• Anti-abortion condition. HUD’s guidance imposes an abortion-related funding condition on state and local agencies. The guidance, however, fails to explain what it means to “facilitate” or “promote” abortion, how FHAP agencies might do so, or why this condition unrelated to the administration of fair housing law is being imposed upon FHAP funding recipients.
• Immigration condition. HUD’s guidance prohibits FHAP funding from being used to “subsidize” or “promote” illegal immigration. However, the guidance does not explain what those terms mean.
• Gender ideology condition. HUD’s guidance prohibits state and local agencies from using funds to promote “gender ideology.” However, the definition of “gender ideology” is so imprecise that states and FHAP agencies would be required to guess what it means.

The attorneys general note that these conditions come after HUD gutted its own fair housing enforcement capabilities by slashing its headcount and significantly reducing the number of housing discrimination cases it charges. The agency also fired employee whistleblowers after they publicly sounded the alarm about its decimation of fair housing enforcement. 

In California, the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) collaborates with HUD under the FHAP. CRD does critical work to protect Californians from discrimination in housing. For example, in December 2025, CRD announced reforms at more than two dozen apartment complexes across California following an undercover fair housing test that identified evidence of potential discrimination against applicants who have previously been involved with the criminal justice system. HUD’s guidance prohibits CRD and other state and local agencies from pursuing these claims if they want to continue receiving FHAP funding.

Attorney General Bonta and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul are co-leading today’s lawsuit. Joining them are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

REDDING — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today, in partnership with Shasta County District Attorney Stephanie Bridgett, announced a settlement with a Redding property management company, Property Upsurge, and its property-owning affiliates. The settlement resolves allegations that Property Upsurge, which manages approximately 1,300 rental units across Northern California, improperly issued eviction notices, imposed rent increases above what state law allows, and charged higher rents to tenants using Section 8 vouchers, among other egregious conduct in violation of California law. As part of the settlement, Property Upsurge must pay $550,000 to tenants and provide an additional $200,000 in debt relief, pay $50,000 in civil penalties, and take specific actions to ensure compliance with injunctive terms. 

“Forcing families out of their homes, charging illegal rent, and targeting vulnerable tenants is not just unjust, it's unlawful,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Every Californian, in every corner of our state, deserves housing that is safe, stable, and reliable. Today’s settlement and my office’s tenant protection work proves that if landlords or property managers, no matter how small or large, violate tenant protections laws, my office will come knocking. I thank the Shasta County District Attorney’s Office, Legal Services of Northern California, and City of Redding’s Code Enforcement Division for their assistance with this investigation.”

“This resolution reflects our strong partnership with state and local agencies and our commitment to protecting residents of Shasta County,” said Shasta County District Attorney Stephanie A. Bridgett. “We will continue working to address unlawful business practices and help ensure tenants are treated fairly under the law.”

In 2023, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) launched an investigation into Property Upsurge, in partnership with the Shasta County District Attorney’s Office. The investigation revealed that Property Upsurge, which is a major property owner and management company in Redding’s lower-to mid-cost rental market, had violated the California Tenant Protection Act, California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, state tenant protection laws governing habitability and liquidated damages, and California’s Unfair Competition Law. Violations included issuing pretextual eviction notices, imposing rent increases above what state law allows, charging fees without engaging in the required liquidated-damages analysis, engaging in localized habitability violations, and charging higher rents to tenants using Section 8 vouchers, in violation of California's civil rights laws.

Under today’s settlement, which is subject to court approval, Property Upsurge is required to:

• Pay $550,000 to tenant victims, provide an additional $200,000 in debt relief, and pay $50,000 in civil penalties, which will be split between the state and Shasta County and used for the enforcement of consumer protection laws.
• Comply with the Tenant Protection Act’s substantial-remodel eviction process requirements.
• Design and implement new policies and procedures for tracking and reviewing rent increases to ensure that they are in line with state law, and train employees on these changes.
• Complete an annual compliance audit covering all rent increases for the next three years.
• Cease charging three-day notice fees entirely, engage an expert to conduct an analysis to support any late fees charged by the company, and limit those fees to the actual costs resulting from late payments of rent.
• Respond to all tenant complaints within a reasonable time, not to exceed three business days, and as immediately as possible for conditions affecting life, safety, health, and immediate well-being of residents.
• Report code enforcement citations and information on tenant complaints to DOJ and the District Attorney. 
• Rent units at the same rate regardless of whether tenants pay with government vouchers.

Attorney General Bonta is committed to protecting the rights of tenants across California. Last year, Attorney General Bonta and nine other attorneys general, announced a $7 million settlement with Greystar Management Services LLC to prevent the use of software that uses sensitive information to align rent prices. He also secured a $495,000 settlement with Mission Rock Residential California, Inc. resolving allegations that the company had raised rent for 140 families in excess of the Tenant Protection Act’s rent cap.

Members of the public are encouraged to visit DOJ’s Housing Portal and HCD’s website for more resources and information aimed at supporting access to housing. If you believe your landlord has violated the law, you can file a report online at www.oag.ca.gov/report. Tenants who need legal help are encouraged to visit www.lawhelpca.org to find legal aid resources in their communities.

Today’s victory comes on the heels of last week’s decision by the Supreme Court of California denying the City’s petition for review

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that the State secured a decision from the San Diego Superior Court requiring the City of Huntington Beach to, among other things, adopt a housing element within 120 days and restricting the City’s land use authority, effective immediately, until it does so. The City was required to submit a compliant housing element on October 15, 2021, more than four years ago. Today’s decision effectively puts an end to the City’s policy of blocking affordable housing for its residents.

On March 9, 2023, Attorney General Bonta, Governor Gavin Newsom, and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Gustavo Velasquez filed suit against the City for failing to timely adopt a compliant housing element. The State’s lawsuit sought a court order setting a 120-day deadline for the City to come into compliance and limiting the City’s permitting, zoning, and subdivision approvals until the City adopted a substantially compliant housing element — as required under state law. On May 15, 2024, the San Diego Superior Court found that the City violated California’s Housing Element Law, but its final order omitted any references to the remedies requested by the State. The State petitioned the California Fourth District Court of Appeal for an order requiring the San Diego Superior Court to provide those mandatory remedies, and the Court of Appeal granted the State’s petition. Subsequently, the City filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court of California, seeking reversal of the appellate decision. Last week, the Supreme Court of California denied the City’s petition, which returned the case to the San Diego Superior Court. Today’s order provides the relief originally requested by the State in 2023.

“After extensive proceedings in the courts, Governor Newsom, HCD Director Velasquez, and I have secured the relief that we sought all along. The City of Huntington Beach has now been ordered to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Huntington Beach is not above the law. Its leaders must comply with all our laws, including our state’s housing laws. We remain fully committed to ensuring that Huntington Beach does its part to address our state’s housing crisis. It has been squandering public money for far too long trying to shirk that responsibility.”

“Huntington Beach needs to end this pathetic NIMBY behavior," said Governor Gavin Newsom. "They are failing their own citizens by wasting time and money that could be used to create much-needed housing. No more excuses, you lost once again — it’s time to get building.”

“This decision once again reaffirms that no one is above the law, and Huntington Beach can no longer refuse to do its part to address California’s crisis of housing affordability and homelessness,” said HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez. “Charter cities are not exempt from state housing law, and the few bad actors who believe so need to stop looking for a way to avoid their responsibilities.” 

In addition to requiring the City to adopt a housing element within 120 days, the San Diego Superior Court ordered the following:

• The June 20, 2024 order finding that the City is out of compliance with the Housing Element Law remains effective for purposes of the penalty provisions of Gov. Code section 65585(l), which provides for escalating penalties after one year of non-compliance with a court order, culminating potentially in the appointment of a receiver.
• The City must fast track the review and approval of Builder's Remedy projects.
• The City must fast track the review and approval of projects that would have been entitled to by-right treatment if the City had adopted its draft housing element in 2023.
• The City cannot use existing land use policies to deny projects that would have been entitled to by-right treatment in its draft housing element.
• The City's permitting, rezoning, and subdivision authority is otherwise suspended for sites identified in its draft housing element.  

In response to the State’s lawsuit, the City of Huntington Beach filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the certain California housing laws. The City’s lawsuit was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s dismissal, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit then denied the City’s petition for rehearing en banc. The City has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the aforementioned rulings, and that request remains ongoing.