Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Assembly Bill

AB 2390: Streamlined housing approvals: objective standards: review and modifications.

Enacted Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

AB 2390 is a assembly bill introduced in the California Assembly on February 20, 2026. According to its official title, it concerns: Streamlined housing approvals: objective standards: review and modifications. Primary sponsor: Pilar Schiavo (D). Most recent recorded action (September 29, 2026): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 799, Statutes of 2026.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

The Planning and Zoning Law, until January 1, 2036, authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies specified objective planning standards (streamlining process). Existing law, for purposes of this streamlining process, authorizes a development proponent to request a modification to an approved development if submitted to the local government before the issuance of the final building permit required for construction of the development. Existing law requires a local government to approve a modification if it determines the modification is consistent with the objective planning standards in effect when the original development application was first submitted. Existing law requires evaluations of modifications for consistency with the objective planning standards to be made using the same assumptions and analytical methodology the local government originally used, as described.

This bill would instead require the local government to approve a modification if it determines the modification is consistent with objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that were in effect when the original development application or notice of intent was first submitted, as described. The bill would also require subsequent modifications to be evaluated for consistency using the same assumptions and analytical methodology the local government originally used, or that was used in a previous modification, as described. The bill would make conforming changes.

Existing law provides that if a development proponent requests a modification, as described above, the time during which approval of the development remains valid is extended for the number of days between the submittal of a modification request and the date of its final approval, plus an additional 180 days to allow time to obtain a building permit. Existing law also further extends that time during the pendency of litigation, if any.

This bill would provide that the litigation extension is not limited to the first request for a modification submitted by the development proponent.

This bill would also make nonsubstantive changes.

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.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 1

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Pilar SchiavoPrimary sponsorDemocraticAssembly40

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 799, Statutes of 2026.
  2. Approved by the Governor.
  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 72. Noes 0. Page 6154.).
  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 5324.).
  7. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.
  8. From committee: Be ordered to second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to Consent Calendar.
  9. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
  10. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 1).
  11. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.
  12. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 10).

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page