The post Newsom Has 9 Days to Decide: Could This Bill Spike Your HOA Fees? first appeared on Crafting Your Home.
Gov. Gavin Newsom has until September 30 to sign or veto Assembly Bill 2050, legislation that would force California homeowners associations to fund their reserve accounts fully; a change that could translate into higher dues or one-time special assessments for millions of residents.
The bill, authored by Assemblymember Jessica Caloza and now sitting on the governor’s desk after being enrolled and presented to his office on September 3, has split housing advocates, HOA managers, and consumer groups over how far the state should go to prevent building neglect.
What AB 2050 actually requires
The bill amends the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, the body of law governing California’s homeowners associations, by adding a new requirement to Civil Code Section 5552.
Starting January 1, 2032, associations would have to fund their reserve accounts each year at whatever level a reserve study determines is the minimum needed to keep the account from dropping below zero over the following three decades.
If a reserve account is still projected to run dry within that 30-year window, the association would have to funnel 15% of its gross annual budget into reserves every year.
Where a full transfer isn’t possible without breaching existing caps on assessment increases, the bill allows boards to levy a special reserve assessment, spreading the shortfall across homeowners over as many as nine fiscal years.
Why lawmakers pushed the bill now
Caloza introduced AB 2050 in February, and it picked up an unusual pairing of co-authors: Republican Assemblymember Diane Dixon alongside Democrat Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur.
That cross-party backing helped move it through the Assembly before the Senate Housing Committee advanced it in June, with senators Steve Glazer and Lena Gonzalez abstaining and Republican Kelly Seyarto casting the lone no vote, according to the Center for California Homeowner Association Law.
Supporters frame the bill as overdue insurance against the kind of catastrophic building failure that killed 98 people when Champlain Towers South collapsed in Surfside, Florida, in June 2021.
Florida lawmakers responded by mandating structural inspections and reserve funding for condo associations statewide, and AB 2050 borrows from that model by also requiring inspections of buildings and significant common areas at least once every three years.
The financial case for tighter reserves
Nearly a quarter of California households pay some form of HOA due, according to U.S. Census Bureau data, meaning a shift in reserve rules would ripple through a large share of the state’s housing stock.
Monthly assessments already range from a few hundred dollars to four figures in some buildings, and insurance and maintenance costs have pushed those numbers upward in recent years.
Condo owners have felt the squeeze most acutely.
Fannie Mae began placing buildings with insufficient reserves or unresolved maintenance issues on a lending blacklist last year, a designation that can block owners in those buildings from refinancing or selling to buyers who need a mortgage.
Robert DeNichilo, legislative co-chair of the Community Associations Institute’s California Legislative Action Committee, told the San Francisco Chronicle that underfunded reserves are already a barrier to financing, arguing the bill forces associations to budget for costs that exist regardless of whether they’re funded.
Related: Arizona Homeowner Says He Lost His $475,000 House Over Less Than $1,000 in HOA Dues
Where the pushback is coming from
The Consumer Federation of California has taken the opposite position, warning that AB 2050 does little to protect homeowners from the assessments it would trigger.
Executive director Robert Herrell told the Chronicle the organization supports the goal of proper reserve funding but wants it paired with caps on how much and how fast fees can rise, along with stronger financial guardrails so boards can’t impose steep special assessments without oversight.
That tension over pace versus protection runs through most of the bill’s legislative history. Committee analyses show lawmakers repeatedly debated whether a nine-fiscal-year runway for special assessments gives homeowners enough time to absorb the cost, or whether it simply delays a bill that arrives regardless.
What happens if Newsom signs or vetoes
A signature would put California alongside Florida in mandating hard reserve-funding floors for HOAs, formalizing a shift already underway through smaller measures like Assembly Bill 130, which Newsom signed in June 2025 and which capped most HOA fines at $100 per violation.
A veto would send Caloza back to the drawing board, likely with pressure to add the cost protections the Consumer Federation has been requesting.
With the September 30 deadline closing in, the decision now rests entirely with the governor, and either outcome will shape how California’s HOA-governed communities budget for the next three decades.
Other Posts You May Like
- 6 things real estate agents say you should always address before selling your home
- Don’t Get Rid of These Things If You Want to Sell Your Home Faster, Realtors Say
If you like what you just read, then subscribe to our newsletter and follow us on social media.
