[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6674616,"mediaKeyId","2353766-8636f0ffad6f981b868aacdc43fe8ae6","parentId",2353766,"title","Oxnard planning commission chair asks Simi Valley commissioners to support stipends for commissioners","audioSeconds",140,"startMs",525000,"endMs",665000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2353766-8636f0ffad6f981b868aacdc43fe8ae6&start=525&end=665","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2353766-8636f0ffad6f981b868aacdc43fe8ae6/thumbnail_525000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6674616/Simi-Valley/Ventura-County/California/Oxnard-planning-commission-chair-asks-Simi-Valley-commissioners-to-support-stipends-for-commissioners","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6674616-3d7ac074a2b6df5e247815b4aca7777e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442763&Signature=oPb5oD85QHNsBE-T8IVw3Dws42EslB9G7yCWAmR5SEFvZwrwk-9n2HvSFEBPLaKryhOcwBa5U-RCAEBblGz6nWWsG3zrC-OqjipYixlKSvUZR6UrjBsqmH73kmLfOBoH1VEllZDBSWIKrVVk0yXE-HliUhIeYG6aKCpflMpEHztyzOTIFDP4Si5ys-mAyaU2PnkEG8WbLeraEgmr75JAxNjyDo2QfWPQT-Twmj-i7hLbNywS33rh0xe-rCw7lzSlA7zdG09u~kW6EifiQN-An357PL~Jilj-17LsAsryNSZR8k~rapbZm0dYSg-ZypnezM2TppCrbaUzhQKzaentRA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Simi Valley","date","2025-02-20T03:52:15.907Z","article","Ronald Arguejo, chair of the Oxnard Planning Commission, used the Feb. 19 public comment period at the Simi Valley Planning Commission meeting to ask for the commission’s support for a resolution to authorize stipends for Oxnard planning commissioners.

\"I am requesting your support in our commission's effort to allow stipends for our members,\" Arguejo said, identifying himself as chair of the Oxnard Planning Commission and explaining that the Oxnard Commission had passed a resolution directed to its city council.

Arguejo said that among Ventura County cities with separate planning commissions, Oxnard was one of two that did not provide commissioner compensation and that he intended to contact Simi Valley commissioners by email with information and potential avenues of support before the matter goes to the Oxnard City Council.

The Simi Valley Planning Commission did not take action on the request during the meeting; the public comment was accepted and the commission proceeded to the scheduled agenda items.

Ending

Arguejo thanked the commission and said he would follow up by email with supporting materials and avenues for commissioners who wished to support the Oxnard resolution.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Ronald Arguejo, chair of the Oxnard Planning Commission, addressed the Simi Valley Planning Commission during public comments to request support for a resolution asking the Oxnard City Council to allow stipends for planning commissioners.","taxTitle","Simi Valley, Ventura County, California","taxId",3724,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6674620,"Simi Valley planning staff briefed on sweeping 2025 state housing laws, tighter timelines for approvals",2772,721000,3493000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2353766-8636f0ffad6f981b868aacdc43fe8ae6&start=721&end=3493","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2353766-8636f0ffad6f981b868aacdc43fe8ae6/thumbnail_721000.jpg","/articles/6674620/Simi-Valley/Ventura-County/California/Simi-Valley-planning-staff-briefed-on-sweeping-2025-state-housing-laws-tighter-timelines-for-approvals","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6674620-0485fe834917c4ddc5f80b70ec95a4f6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770442763&Signature=WUlSQcJdv8~HCxaIiSqnbxFKsYMsGASz~pZrEj4ojycSZro4NsIjZLTOnW95Utq3Eu5qhg8EulYR7Ntlm68lOb8ZLF5wzMCjp6YEahP3JMv0M~-0h39~SHsv878H2Z53o7woE~W542TgYJ2ndoXX0G2EuXquMdldGAkPt8XfxPSErlz0M3tzzB5sbGus~KQiFFNALzAip3JPL0abGVsizpkRaD6gvboQv-hbuxblR9lwtbHVZ6iYdI3-V7VuXSpy7iQstNSpAcwDmy0kzg5Nvi1LGahPL4tc3nfKKZb0v4TDEmSVZa~DoFOiUIhbCQT1kcsjwUOey6geJxdQ87KE-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Elena Jerley, a representative from the Simi Valley City Attorney’s Office, told the Planning Commission on Feb. 19 that a large set of state housing measures that took effect in 2025 will change how the city reviews and approves many housing projects.

Jerley summarized about 45 housing-related bills this year and focused on a set of changes she said are most likely to affect local planning practice: amendments to the Housing Accountability Act, expanded ministerial approval categories (including SB 35, SB 9 and new small‑housing development rules), changes to ADU/JADU law, updates to density bonus and fee rules, and new requirements for elements of the general plan.

\"This is not friendly to cities — that's the short version,\" Jerley told commissioners, adding the Legislature and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) have increased enforcement tools and potential penalties for local actions found in violation of the Housing Accountability Act (Government Code 65589.5).

Why it matters: Jerley said the changes narrow local discretion in high-priority housing pathways and speed review timelines. Examples she cited include a 60‑day target for ministerial review of many multiunit or commercial-area projects, a 30‑day window to review resubmittals, and a 60‑ to 90‑day deadline pattern for larger projects. For some project types, failure to meet statutory timelines can result in a project being deemed approved under state law.

Key provisions Jerley outlined

- Housing Accountability Act (AB 1893 as presented): The law now defines \"builder's remedy\" projects more explicitly, expands the acts that can constitute a de facto disapproval (including excessive hearings or untimely incompleteness letters), and increases penalties and remedies available to HCD, the Attorney General and private parties.

- Housing in commercial areas (AB 2243 as presented): Jurisdictions must allow certain affordable or mixed‑income housing ministerially on commercial parcels up to previously 20 acres and, under the new language, on some regional mall sites up to 100 acres, sites within 500 feet of freeways (with air‑filtration conditions), and in some high‑rise districts. Jerley noted tight local review timelines for these projects (60 days for up to 150 units, 90 days for larger projects, 30 days for resubmittals).

- SB 9 changes (as presented, SB 450/SB 450‑amendments referenced): SB 9 continues to allow up to two units on single‑family lots and urban lot splits; recent changes remove some prior limits (for example, local size caps that treated SB 9 units differently than other units in the same zone). Jerley said the law now restricts objective standards that would not apply uniformly within the underlying zone and imposes a 60‑day timeline to approve or deny SB 9 applications; if the timeline is missed, the project may be deemed approved.

- Small housing developments (SB 684 as presented): The ministerial subdivision pathway for up to 10 units expands to include vacant single‑family sites, multifamily sites under 5 acres and single‑family subdivisions on parcels up to 1.5 acres; minimum parcel sizes and minimum density rules were described.

- ADUs and JADUs: The state increased allowances for ADUs on existing multifamily buildings (up to eight ADUs in some instances) and added a definition of \"livable space.\" Jerley noted that certain state‑exempt ADUs remain shielded from additional local requirements and that local agencies may legalize unpermitted ADUs and JADUs built before Jan. 1, 2020, subject to building‑ and safety‑code compliance.

- Fees and fee transparency: AB 1820 (as presented) requires a preliminary fee and exaction estimate within 30 business days of a developer's request during the preliminary application process and obliges cities to post fee schedules and fee studies online. AB 3012 (as presented) will require a fee‑estimate tool on municipal websites by a specified compliance date (Simi Valley must comply by 07/01/2032, per Jerley).

- Other bills and planning elements: Jerley summarized measures that (1) limit required hearings (no more than five for certain housing projects), (2) extend expiring entitlements (AB 2729 as presented), (3) require lower traffic mitigation fees for transit‑oriented developments (AB 2553 as presented), (4) add extreme heat to the safety‑element considerations on or after 01/01/2028 (AB 2684 as presented), and (5) require wildlife connectivity be addressed in the conservation element after January 2028.

What the commission asked and staff flagged

Commissioners asked how aggressively the state pursues enforcement and litigation. Jerley said HCD is assertive, may involve the Attorney General when the city does not remedy problems, and that developers and potential residents also have standing to sue under the Housing Accountability Act.

On practical process issues, Jerley warned that incompleteness letters must be issued within 30 days of application submission and that the city’s application checklist must be thorough: if an item is not on the checklist, the city cannot later require it without running the risk of a de facto disapproval.

For fee administration, Jerley acknowledged a practical difficulty: a true total of all fees and exactions can be hard to calculate within 30 days of final approval because several downstream approvals are required before building permits are issued.

Background and next steps

Jerley said she would provide commissioners with a written copy of the slides and the relevant Government Code citations. She offered to return for a deeper, multi‑hour briefing if the commission wants a more detailed walk‑through of specific statutes.

Commission action

No formal policy changes or votes on local ordinances occurred on Feb. 19. The Planning Commission received the legislative update and the presentation was opened for commissioner questions and comments.

Ending

Jerley closed the presentation by reiterating that the new laws will change the practical landscape for local planning and permitting and that staff will provide citations and materials for further review.","The City Attorney’s Office gave the Planning Commission a summary of dozens of 2025 state housing law changes — including expanded ministerial approvals, stricter timelines, and broader definitions for SB 9, ADUs and small housing developments — and warned some provisions increase enforcement risk for cities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Oxnard planning commission chair asks Simi Valley commissioners to support stipends for commissioners

Simi Valley planning staff briefed on sweeping 2025 state housing laws, tighter timelines for approvals