Another legislative session in California means more regulations for housing providers. These are some bills that are waiting for the Governor’s signature.
SB 1365: Emergency Price-Gouging Expansion
SB 1365 would extend California’s 10% emergency price-gouging cap to long-term leases. Right now, Penal Code Section 396 only applies to rental housing with an initial lease term of one year or less. This bill eliminates that protection.
What does this mean? During any declared emergency, landlords would face criminal penalties for rent increases above 10% – even on multi-year leases signed before the emergency. This is a criminal statute, stacked on top of AB 1482 and local rent control.
The bill does allow landlords to justify increases above 10% if they’re based on repairs or improvements made within the year prior to the emergency declaration. But the compliance burden and criminal risk make this a significant concern.
Violation of Section 396 can be prosecuted as a misdemeanor, with penalties up to one year in county jail, a fine up to $10,000, or both.
SB 1296: Pet Policy Disclosure Requirements
If signed, SB 1296 will require landlords and property managers to disclose their pet policy in writing through multiple channels.
Starting April 1, 2027, you must provide your pet policy:
- On your property website
- In digital advertisements
- To rental search engines
- With every rental application form
The policy must spell out the rights, responsibilities, and requirements for tenants with pets.
Here’s the kicker: if you charge an application fee but don’t disclose the pet policy first, and the applicant becomes ineligible or declines because of your pet restrictions, you have to refund the application fee.
Not a huge burden for most landlords who already have clear pet policies. But it’s another compliance requirement to track.
SB 1160: Eviction Reporting
SB 1160 cleared the Legislature on August 31, 2026 and is now on the Governor’s desk.
This bill requires the Judicial Council to collect and publicly report detailed eviction data starting in 2027-2029, depending on each county’s ability to report through the automated data collection system.
Here’s what courts would have to track and report quarterly, aggregated by ZIP Code:
- Total number of unlawful detainer cases filed
- Cases that resulted in default, stipulated, or other pretrial judgments
- Cases that went to trial (and whether they were bench or jury trials)
- Cases dismissed before trial at the plaintiff’s request
The Judicial Council would then publish this data annually on its website in spreadsheet format starting in 2029.
What’s the real concern here?
Data collection always sounds neutral. But once the state starts tracking eviction data by ZIP Code and publishing it publicly, what comes next?
The sponsors are tenant advocacy groups. The bill is positioned as “transparency” to help policymakers understand eviction patterns. But landlords know where this leads – more targeted regulations, more pressure on specific neighborhoods, more ammunition for rent control expansion.
If this data shows certain ZIP Codes have higher eviction rates, expect calls for enhanced tenant protections, just-cause eviction requirements, or stricter rent caps in those areas.
AB 2042: Service of Process Fix (Good News)
Finally, some common sense.
AB 2042 would stop courts from dismissing an entire eviction case over imperfect service of process. The tenant can still answer and defend themselves. This is far better than a full dismissal over technical service issues.
This bill protects landlords from having meritorious cases thrown out on procedural technicalities while still preserving tenant rights to respond.
Landlords should support this one.
Conclusion
The pattern is clear. More regulation, more compliance requirements, and more defenses for tenants in eviction cases. Landlords need to stay informed, document everything, and work with experienced legal counsel to navigate these changes.
This is the new reality of being a housing provider in California.
