By midyear, the California Apartment Association had helped stop, stall or narrow a dozen high-priority rental housing bills that would have added costs, legal exposure or new operating burdens for rental housing providers.
AB 1157 — rent control expansion measure fails to advance
AB 1157, a high-profile proposal to tighten statewide rent caps and expand rent control to additional housing types, failed to advance in the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The bill would have reduced the permissible rental rate increase under current law to the lesser of 2% plus the percentage change in the cost of living, or 5%.
CAA argued it would discourage reinvestment in rental housing, reduce supply and increase market instability.
Position: Oppose. Status: Failed passage.
AB 1611 — tax bill targeting rental housing investment dies in committee
AB 1611, which would have denied California tax deferral under certain 1031 exchanges for qualifying rental housing investors, was held in Assembly Revenue and Taxation and did not move forward. A 1031 exchange is a U.S. tax strategy that allows an investor to sell an investment property and defer paying capital gains taxes by reinvesting the proceeds into another qualifying investment property. The name comes from Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code.
CAA and coalition partners argued the measure would penalize lawful reinvestment while doing little to address underlying housing supply constraints.
Position: Oppose. Status: Died in committee.
SB 1155 and SB 1243 — new eviction barriers blocked
Two Senate proposals to impose additional eviction-case barriers stalled in Appropriations.
- SB 1155 would have barred certain eviction and late fees against tenants who are federal employees during federal shutdown-related income disruption.
- SB 1243 would have paused unlawful detainer actions and late fees tied to tenants who are detained by immigration enforcement.
CAA argued both proposals shifted broad public-policy burdens onto private housing providers, including small owners dependent on rent income for core operations.
Position: Oppose. Status: SB 1155 and SB 1243 died in committee.
AB 2064 — criminal history screening restrictions blocked
AB 2064, which would have added criminal history as a protected characteristic under key anti-discrimination frameworks, was held in Assembly Appropriations and did not advance. The bill would have prohibited the use of criminal screening.
CAA warned that the measure would expose rental housing providers to litigation even when policies were facially neutral.
Position: Oppose. Status: AB 2064 died in committee.
AB 2095 — employee criminal history screening bill stalls on Assembly floor
AB 2095 would have changed how housing providers screen prospective employees. The bill stalled on the Assembly floor and did not advance. The bill would have created a presumption that an individual who has completed a criminal sentence and other education programs cannot be automatically banned from employment, and it would have required employers to identify potentially disqualifying job duties before conducting background checks.
CAA argued the bill would have made safety-based hiring decisions more difficult for housing providers whose employees access tenant units and financial records and would have increased litigation exposure for small operators without dedicated HR staff.
Position: Oppose. Status: Stalled on the Assembly floor.
AB 2609 — pet rent and deposit cap proposal stalled
AB 2609 would have capped pet-related rent and additional deposit amounts at levels CAA said were too low to cover actual damage and turnover costs.
The bill did not move out of the Assembly after its Judiciary hearing was canceled.
Position: Oppose. Status: Halted/stalled.
AB 1725 — oil well disclosure and methane mandate halted
AB 1725 would have required covered housing providers to make oil-well proximity disclosures and install methane monitoring/alarm systems for qualifying properties.
CAA and coalition partners argued that the responsibility for oil-well hazards should remain with operators and regulators, not neighboring property owners.
Position: Oppose. Status: AB 1725 died in committee.
SB 1090 — gut-and-amend removes prior offer-restriction language
SB 1090, as initially introduced, would have prohibited offers from third parties to buy property in the Eaton wildfire zone. CAA opposed that version of the bill. The bill was amended on June 10, 2026, and rewritten to prohibit the owners of property in the fire zone from splitting their lots or adding ADUs. CAA continues to oppose the bill, arguing it is not helpful to property owners in the fire zone.
Position: Oppose. Status: Gut-and-amended June 10, 2026; bill pending.
AB 2350 — tenant-loan restriction proposal does not move forward
AB 2350, which would have prohibited tenants from using consumer loans to pay rent, did not move forward after the author decided not to pursue the measure.
CAA took a position of oppose unless amended, arguing that a broad prohibition would limit financial options for renters facing short-term cash-flow disruptions and that targeted amendments addressing predatory lending practices would be a better approach.
Position: Oppose unless amended. Status: Author announced the bill will not move forward.
AB 2616 — portable cooling device and temperature mandate pulled
AB 2616 would have required landlords to allow tenants to install portable cooling devices and established an 82-degree indoor temperature standard as a landlord compliance obligation under the substandard housing code.
CAA’s opposition letter argued the bill’s provisions directly contradicted each other: one section assigned cost and responsibility to tenants while another would have made temperature compliance a landlord obligation, creating legal exposure for housing providers.
The author pulled the bill from its assigned committee, and it will not advance this year.
Position: Oppose. Status: Pulled by author; will not advance this year.
AB 1674 — grocery store mandate tied to housing development shelved
AB 1674 would have required housing developers building in or near a “food desert” to either set aside space for a grocery store or contribute to a fund supporting one nearby. A food desert is an area — often a low-income neighborhood or rural community — where people have limited access to affordable, nutritious food, especially fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grains and other healthy options.
CAA and the California Building Industry Association argued in a coalition letter that the proposal would create additional barriers, costs and uncertainty for housing production.
The author announced he will not move forward with the bill this year.
Position: Oppose. Status: Author indicated the bill will not move forward this year.
Midyear takeaway
The first half of 2026 has produced a clear result: sustained advocacy by CAA and coalition partners helped stop or narrow multiple proposals that would have increased compliance complexity and operating costs for rental housing providers.
“`
