$11.25 billion total: $10 billion in general obligation bonds plus $1.25 billion in revenue bonds for CalVet home loans. Multifamily Housing Program $5.1B, supportive housing rehab $1.15B, Portfolio Reinvestment Program $750M, CalHome $600M, My Home downpayment assistance $500M, Infill Infrastructure $500M, Joe Serna Jr. Farmworker Housing $450M, student housing $350M, Tribal Housing $200M, Affordable Housing Innovation Fund $200M, and Community Anti-Displacement and Preservation $200M. Backers project roughly 40,000 new affordable homes and 5,500 preserved ones. The state analyst puts the cost at $500 million to $600 million a year for about 25 years. Two things on this page depend on it passing: HCD’s Portfolio Reinvestment Program Round 3 and the CAPP program in SB 1091, which the Governor signed in September.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association had qualified the Local Taxpayer Protection Act for this ballot. It would have capped local transfer taxes far below Measure ULA’s top rate and applied retroactively, which would have killed ULA outright. Jarvis withdrew it after a last-minute agreement with the Governor and legislative leaders. Prop 43 is what replaced it. Starting January 1, 2027, any new, increased or extended local special tax proposed by voters needs two-thirds instead of a simple majority. It is prospective only. Measure ULA and every other local tax already approved are untouched. The yes campaign is run by Howard Jarvis. The no side is a labor coalition led by SEIU California, joined by the California Democratic Party and California YIMBY.

Authorizes up to $25 billion in CalHFA revenue bonds for a second-mortgage program covering up to 17 percent of the purchase price of a new home under about $1.5 million, restricted to newly built homes or converted nonresidential buildings where the buyer is the first purchaser. Buyers repay it as a fixed-rate second mortgage with monthly payments. Sponsored by former legislative leader Robert Hertzberg, backed by the California Association of Realtors and construction unions, which have put in over $22 million. The California Budget and Policy Center flags four problems: the monthly repayment eats much of the benefit, the required 3 percent buyer contribution is still out of reach for most, new-construction-only pushes demand toward the exurbs, and the eligible income band skews white.

Creates the Community Anti-Displacement and Preservation Program to acquire and rehabilitate unrestricted housing and lock long-term affordability restrictions onto it. HCD selects a private program manager and distributes funds to eligible borrowers and regional housing entities, with protections for sitting residents. Eligible borrowers explicitly include community land trusts and nonprofits, so the money can reach the small mission-driven owners who actually buy this kind of building. It creates the fund but not the money: Prop 1 carries $200 million for CAPP. Co-sponsored by the California Community Land Trust Network, Enterprise, Housing California, and Public Advocates through the Stable Homes Coalition.

Expands the Joint Exercise of Powers Act so nonprofit housing developers can join a JPA with public agencies to pool risk and self-insure. Participating public agencies are shielded from the underlying debts and liabilities. Revenue the pool generates has to go back into technical support, continuing education, safety engineering, and operational advisory help for members. Direct response to the insurance crisis, which is now one of the largest line items driving affordable housing operating costs statewide.

Lets HCD, at its discretion, move residual receipts or excess reserves from one HCD-regulated rental property to another owned by the same sponsor or an affiliate, to stabilize a building in trouble instead of watching it fail while another building sits on cash it cannot legally move. Excess reserves means replacement reserves beyond near-term capital needs, or operating reserves above the regulatory minimums. The final text does not define “sponsor” and does not mention community land trusts, so whether a CLT qualifies comes down to how HCD applies its existing definitions.

Gives mission-driven qualified purchasers, which the motion names as nonprofit affordable housing organizations, community land trusts, and nonprofit developers, a right of first offer on rental properties with five or more units and on mobile home parks in unincorporated LA County before they hit the open market. Single-family rentals are out of the first phase. A tenant right to purchase, TOPA, is deferred to a possible later phase, which is what the 120-day reassessment is really about. The California Apartment Association and landlord groups opposed it going in and will be at the drafting table.

Measure A replaced Measure H as the County’s half-cent homelessness and affordable housing sales tax, with a dedicated affordable housing share routed through LACAHSA. The County’s own framing of this year’s plan is that it is making hard choices under “funding reductions, shifts, and deficit scenarios across local, state and federal levels.” Read alongside the HUD FY2027 proposal on this page: the federal cuts are a direct input into what Measure A has to backfill.

LACDA plans to proactively identify at-risk properties in its own loan portfolio rather than waiting for owners to ask for help. The scale is the story: roughly half of LACDA’s loan portfolio had negative net operating income in 2024. This is the county-level analog to HCD’s Portfolio Reinvestment Program, and unlike PRP it does not depend on Prop 1 passing.

The formula moved to 90 percent of average CPI instead of 100 percent, with a floor of 1 percent and a ceiling of 4 percent. The old range was 3 to 8 percent. Two add-ons are gone: the utility surcharge for master-metered buildings and the 10 percent bump landlords could take for an additional occupant. Won by the Keep LA Housed coalition. Two other numbers get confused with this one constantly: the state Tenant Protection Act cap on pre-2005 units is 5 percent plus CPI, and unincorporated LA County under its own ordinance was 1.93 percent for July 2025 to June 2026. Three different caps, three different sets of buildings.

Funded mostly by Measure ULA transfer tax revenue and run by LAHD. Round 1 ran seven programs: three new construction, three preservation, and one operating assistance, and put over $117 million out the door. Funds go as grants and loans to developers, nonprofits and land trusts. A community land trust requirement is written into the regulatory language for ULA-funded preservation programs, which is how ULA money gets steered toward permanently community-owned housing rather than a subsidy that expires. That requirement lives in regulation, not in the ballot measure, so it can be changed without a public vote. Council also added quarterly reporting on awards and spending.

Transfer tax on high-value property sales funding affordable housing and tenant services citywide. Two threats resolved in ULA’s favor this year: a Council push to rewrite it via ballot measure was blocked in February 2026, and the Howard Jarvis initiative that would have retroactively voided it was withdrawn in the Prop 43 deal. In July, Council approved a five-year exemption for Palisades fire survivors and a 1.5 percent rate option for affordable or prevailing-wage projects. What remains is the ongoing exemption pressure at Council and the fact that the CLT requirement in ULA-funded preservation programs sits in regulatory language, not in the measure itself.

The Governor’s 2025 reorganization created the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, which now holds HCD, CalHFA, and the new HDFC. HDFC consolidates AHSC, MFSN, MIP, and state-administered 4 percent credits into a single application, and reserves at least half of the tax-exempt bond housing allocation for its own projects. AHSC splits 70 percent affordable housing and 30 percent sustainable communities under the new structure. The single-application design is the thing to weigh in on. Whether a small nonprofit or community land trust can realistically compete in a consolidated process against large developers gets decided in these rules, not later.

New in Round 7: large-city applicants and the counties containing them have to obtain a Prohousing Designation within 12 months of the funding allocation and put up a local funding match. Eligibility also depends on meeting prior-round obligations and complying with HCD guidance on encampments and housing elements, which is where the real pressure on local policy sits.

Rehab loans and Capitalized Operating Subsidy Reserve loans for at-risk affordable housing. Rounds 1 and 2 awarded $427.5 million, including $70 million for 340 permanent supportive housing units in LA County. The COSR structure is the interesting piece: the loan is forgiven if the project meets both the rehabilitation and the COSR requirements. Round 3 is not scheduled and there is no money behind it right now. That changes on November 3 if Prop 1 passes.

The $1.78 billion cut the coalition warned about did not land. AHSC is being restructured under HDFC with up to roughly $560 million a year from Cap-and-Invest proceeds, split about 70 percent affordable housing and 30 percent sustainable communities. CARB’s Cap-and-Invest amendments took effect September 1, 2026, and its next rulemaking is on linkage with other carbon markets. AHSC Round 10, still run by HCD and the Strategic Growth Council, closed applications May 4 and is set to announce awards December 16, 2026.

Lets jurisdictions count acquisition-rehab conversions to affordable housing with 55-year covenants toward up to 25 percent of their lower-income RHNA allocation. Buying and preserving an existing building now counts against the housing targets the state holds cities and counties to. That is a real lever on what City Hall chooses to fund.

Companion to AB 670. Lets jurisdictions count substantial rehab of already deed-restricted affordable housing toward RHNA, where the building is at least 15 years old and receives at least $60,000 per unit in local funding. The $60,000 threshold is the catch. A rehab scoped just under it earns no credit, and therefore no local political interest in funding it.

The President’s proposal cuts HUD by $10.7 billion, about 13 percent, and zeroes out CDBG and HOME Investment Partnerships, the two programs LA City and LA County rely on most for local housing and community development. LACDA runs on CDBG. Homeless Assistance Grants drop to $4.024 billion, and new voucher issuance is barred outside a few special programs. The House committee bill is less severe but still cuts: about $5.9 billion below FY2026 overall, the Community Development Fund down from $7.0 billion to $5.85 billion, and HOME down from $1.25 billion to $500 million.

Four percent LIHTC deals now need only 25 percent of aggregate basis financed with tax-exempt private activity bonds, down from 50 percent. That frees up bond volume cap in oversubscribed states, and about half of all states were oversubscribed. The practical catch: most projects can only support permanent debt at 35 to 45 percent of basis, and states allocate a cushion of 27.5 to 30 percent, so a gap remains that has to be filled with more expensive taxable capital. Several states are using bond recycling to close it. In California, CTCAC decides how much of that flexibility actually gets used.

Would have required HCD to build a statewide strategic plan on housing affordability and homelessness, informed by research and by people with lived experience of homelessness, with clear metrics and a public progress dashboard. It did not mandate spending levels. The point was accountability: California puts under half a percent of its budget into affordable housing and homelessness programs and has no single plan tying that spending to outcomes. Sponsored by ACLU California Action, ACCE, Bring California Home, Corporation for Supportive Housing, Housing Now!, the National Alliance to End Homelessness, and PolicyLink.

Would have let HCD waive annual monitoring fee payments for affordable housing developments in financial distress. Died on the suspense file, which is a cost decision rather than a policy one, so a reintroduction in the 2027-28 session with a smaller fiscal note is realistic.

The Assembly half of the Wicks and Cabaldon $10 billion housing bond package. When the two houses settled on a single vehicle, SB 417 carried the final $11.25 billion bond and AB 736 was left behind. Keeping it on the board as a separate active bill was double-counting the bond, which is why it is here rather than in the active list. The policy it stood for is on your ballot as Prop 1.