The Brief

Alarmed by expensive housing that drives up the cost of college degrees and leaves some students struggling to make rent, California campuses have tried everything from factory-built dormitories to a pilot program that lets students safely sleep in their cars.

Now, a package of laws by state legislators seeks to make it faster to build housing around public colleges and universities by tinkering with land use rules. Proponents hope to encourage community colleges that haven’t previously ventured into housing to dip a toe in the water. And the measures could give higher education new leverage over skeptical neighbors and city governments in the sometimes contentious question of where to house students.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed all three student housing-related bills. Among them, Assembly Bill 648 clarifies that community colleges can build student housing on land they own or lease within a half-mile radius of campuses, no matter local zoning, while Assembly Bill 357 aims to ease aspects of building on college campuses in coastal areas. The most ambitious of the trio, Assembly Bill 893, looks to spur private residential development around public colleges and universities.

“Students are living in overcrowded conditions. They’re living out of their cars. They’re in shelters, all while they’re just trying to make a living, advance their career, set themselves up for success,” said Kate Rodgers, co-chair of the Student HOMES Coalition, which worked to draft all three bills. “I think we’re really failing them if we’re allowing this to keep happening.”

The legislative package, backed by pro-housing groups and colleges, is poised to strengthen the hand of colleges and, in some cases, private developers by reducing some of the government approvals typically needed for new construction.

The student housing measures come as California legislators have increasingly sought to trim red tape they say is partially to blame for the state’s gaping overall housing shortage. That includes the passage this spring of landmark state legislation expected to shield most new urban apartment buildings from the California Environmental Quality Act.

The student housing bills faced a smattering of opposition, including from municipalities and environmental groups. “We hear a lot of gripes from local communities when Sacramento comes in and imposes their point of view and decision on a neighborhood without proper input,” said Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, R-San Diego, explaining at an Assembly hearing why he opposed AB 648. “There’s a reason why housing decisions are best made at the local level.”

The campus housing crunch has at times driven a vexing wedge between California colleges and their surrounding communities. At UC Berkeley, some neighbors, citing worries about noise from student revelry, filed litigation that delayed new university housing. Santa Barbara County and the city of Goleta have each sued the university, alleging it failed to build enough student housing to meet enrollment growth. Many UC Santa Barbara students live off campus in the Isla Vista neighborhood, which is notorious for large street parties.

Student housing advocates are optimistic that incentivizing new construction could benefit students as well as their neighbors by reducing competition for scarce rentals. “It’s better for student relations with the community when you’re not having to fight with locals over housing, and you can actually live on campus or near campus,” said Mike Borisov, a recent graduate of UC San Diego who has worked with the Student HOMES Coalition. “That relieves pressure off the housing market.”

Supporters of the student housing package said the bills aren’t a cure-all, but could help students who might otherwise struggle to afford rent on top of tuition.

“Any housing that’s deed-restricted for affordable housing is a help and a win to our whole system,” said Jonathan White, the chief real estate officer of Fremont-based Abode Housing Development, a nonprofit that builds supportive housing for the formerly homeless and a supporter of AB 893. “And every bit is needed.”

AB 893: Creating ‘campus development zones’

Only a small portion of students at California’s public colleges and universities live on campus. About 41% of UC students, 14% of CSU students, and less than 1% of community college students have on-campus housing, leaving the rest living at home with family or seeking other off-campus housing arrangements.

AB 893 meets that reality with measures intended to jump-start market-rate and affordable housing construction on commercially zoned properties near college campuses. It avoids residential areas — and the risks of displacing locals that currently live in them — while including units for non-students.

Authored by Assemblymember Mike Fong, D-Alhambra, the new law creates so-called campus development zones within a half-mile radius of the main campus of any University of California, California State University, or those in the California Community Colleges system. Private housing developments within the new zones can now become eligible for streamlined local government reviews, provided that a share of rentals are reserved for low-income residents, including potentially students, faculty, or staff experiencing homelessness. They must also meet other development standards.

Rodgers, a recent graduate of UCLA, said she had the Westwood neighborhood surrounding the campus in mind while working on the bill.

“If you walk around Westwood, you see lots of one-story commercial spaces and restaurants,” she said. “And for a housing nerd like myself, I can’t really help but think, ‘What if this was all mixed use?’”

Her group’s analysis of zoning around college campuses suggests that Berkeley and San Diego are other cities where a significant number of commercial properties could be eligible for AB 893, she added.

The bill also takes a crack at addressing another problem. Students might not qualify for affordable apartments built with the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, the most important federal tool to encourage the construction of affordable housing. By contrast, students would be able to rent income-restricted units in projects built under AB 893 based on their eligibility for Cal Grant A or Cal Grant B awards, the California College Promise Grant, or the federal Pell Grant.

AB 648: Clearing hurdles to housing at community colleges

Most California community colleges don’t offer housing. But a growing awareness of how many community college students don’t have a safe or stable place to live is prompting some to reexamine that stance.

The Los Angeles Community College District is among those that have come to view housing as essential to students’ basic needs and academic success, said Sara Hernandez, vice president of the district’s board of trustees.

“If people can’t afford to live in Los Angeles, they’re not going to be able to afford to live to go to school in Los Angeles,” Hernandez said. “And so we’ve really found that it is in our best interest as a community college district to really find some solutions for our students who need housing the most.”

Enter AB 648, which takes effect Jan. 1, 2026. The bill ensures community colleges are authorized to build housing for students, faculty and staff on property they own or lease within a half-mile radius of their campuses without being required to comply with local zoning.

The Los Angeles district is exploring new possibilities for student housing, like buying existing buildings or constructing on-campus units through a public-private partnership. Hernandez said it’s not yet clear how AB 648 will influence its plans, since its campuses span local jurisdictions with different approaches to reviewing developments.

“It really depends on which community and which geographic area you’re in,” Hernandez said. “And so I imagine that there’s going to be a lot of community colleges where this will be really helpful.”

AB 357: Changes for colleges in coastal zones

What do Cuesta College, Pepperdine University and UC San Diego all have in common? They’re all at least partially located in the coastal zone, the area anywhere from 1,000 yards to 5 miles inland where the California Coastal Commission controls construction.

The commission got on some student housing advocates’ radar after UC Santa Barbara had to seek commission approval for its San Benito housing project, which replaced a previous design criticized for its lack of windows. Politicians in both major parties have voiced support for relaxing constraints on coastal homebuilding that require the commission’s go-ahead.

“The goal is not to bypass environmental safeguards, but to create smart streamlined pathways to meet urgent student needs while respecting California’s coastal values,” Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-San Diego, said as he presented AB 357 at an April hearing.

The bill tries to accelerate commission reviews when colleges amend existing development plans. It also requires the commission to defer to colleges and universities regarding how much parking is needed for student housing.

With AB 357 in place, Rodgers is hopeful future university housing will follow in the footsteps of the San Benito project, which the commission approved this spring. San Benito is proof that the commission “can approve these projects on a faster timeline without sacrificing those critical environmental protections that we have under the Coastal Act,” she said.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.