AB 1738 is a California bill that would require every city, county, and charter city to offer homeowners and contractors the option of a remote inspection for certain building permits on one- and two-family homes by July 1, 2027, rather than leaving virtual inspection purely optional as it is today.
Authored by Assemblymember Juan Carrillo, AB 1738 amends California's State Housing Law so local building departments must offer remote inspection as an alternative to an in-person visit for a specified list of permitted work on single- and two-family homes.
The bill doesn't remove any required inspections or lower safety standards; it simply forces departments to make a video-based option, using tools like FaceTime, Zoom, or a dedicated remote inspection software like Virtual Inspection Pro available alongside the traditional site visit.
AB 1738 also extends the same legal liability protections that already apply to in-person inspections to cover remote inspections, so inspectors and agencies aren't exposed to added risk by offering the virtual format.
Local agencies keep the ability to audit remote inspections after the fact to confirm the work shown matched reality, and they can temporarily suspend a homeowner's or contractor's access to remote inspection if that person is caught misrepresenting completed work.
Timeline And Reporting
Local agencies must begin offering remote inspections for the covered project types by July 1, 2027. Starting with the annual report due April 1, 2028, cities and counties must also confirm within their standard planning reports that they've complied with the law, creating a new state-mandated local reporting duty.calmatters.digitaldemocracy+1
Because this adds administrative work for cities and counties, the bill counts as a state-mandated local program, though the state has decided the associated costs won't be reimbursed.
As of spring 2026, the bill was moving through committee, having passed the Housing and Community Development Committee before being re-referred to the Assembly Committee on Local Government.
The bill is co-sponsored by SPUR, the San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association, and Permit Power, a group focused on speeding up clean energy equipment installation. Supporters argue it would reduce delays for housing and clean energy projects by letting lower-risk inspections, like those for water heaters, solar panels, and accessory dwelling units, happen virtually.
Backers describe AB 1738 as a way to cut costs, save time, and free up limited inspector capacity while keeping existing safety standards intact.
They point to cities like Los Angeles and San Bernardino, where remote inspection already works well, as proof it's time to make the option available statewide instead of leaving it up to each city's discretion.
Sources
California Digital Democracy bill tracker for AB 1738: https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1738calmatters.digitaldemocracy
SPUR advocacy letter co-sponsoring AB 1738: https://www.spur.org/publications/advocacy-letter/2026-03-03/spur-co-sponsors-ab-1738-remote-virtual-inspection-act
LegiScan bill text for AB 1738: https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1738/id/3350888
What the bill changes in practice
The practical effect for a building department is procedural rather than technical. Remote inspection stops being an optional pilot that a department may run if it chooses and becomes an expectation that has to be planned for: which inspection types qualify, what evidence is acceptable, how records are retained, and how an applicant requests one. Departments that already ran video inspections during earlier emergency operations have most of the pieces; what they usually lack is the written policy and the records discipline.
A department readiness checklist
| Area | What has to exist |
|---|---|
| Policy | Written eligibility list of inspection types allowed remotely, with exclusions |
| Scheduling | A way for applicants to request a remote slot and receive a join link |
| Technology | Browser-based joining with no app install, so contractors on site can connect |
| Evidence | Session-bound capture, server-side time, location anchored to the permit address |
| Records | Retention aligned to your existing permit record schedule, with export on request |
| Training | Inspectors trained on capture sequences and on when to abort to a site visit |
| Appeals | A defined path when an applicant disputes a remote result |
Choosing which inspections go remote first
Start where the evidence is easiest to produce and the consequences of a miss are lowest: final and re-inspections, simple mechanical and plumbing rough-ins, water heater replacements, and photovoltaic finals. Hold back complex structural work, anything requiring measurement the camera cannot demonstrate, and inspections where access is unsafe for the person holding the phone. Publishing that list matters more than the list itself — contractors plan around certainty.
Records and public accountability
A remote inspection creates a richer record than a physical one, which is an advantage and an obligation. Every capture should be tied to the permit, timestamped by the server rather than the device, anchored to the parcel, retained under the department''s existing schedule, and available for records requests. Virtual Inspection Pro keeps originals immutable, holds annotations as a separate layer, and logs every view and export in the audit trail — see also verified capture and privacy and retention.
What contractors need from you
- A join link by text that opens in a browser on a jobsite phone.
- A published capture sequence per inspection type, so they arrive prepared — see the footing, framing and final checklist.
- Clear connectivity expectations and a stated fallback if the call fails.
- Same-day results in writing, which is the whole reason they will adopt it.
FAQ
What is California AB 1738?
State legislation directing local building departments toward remote and virtual inspection capability for qualifying work, so applicants are not limited to in-person inspection scheduling.
Does AB 1738 require every inspection to be virtual?
No. Departments define which inspection types qualify and which continue to require a site visit.
What technology does a building department need?
A scheduling path, live video that a contractor can join in a browser without installing anything, verified capture, and retention that matches the existing permit records schedule.
How should departments handle a failed remote inspection?
Record the reason, convert it to a scheduled physical inspection, and keep the partial evidence in the permit file.
How long does it take to launch a program?
Departments that scope tightly — a short eligibility list, one capture sequence per type, existing retention rules — typically run a pilot within a quarter. See our 90-day launch guide.
Keep reading
- Is your building department ready for AB 1738? — the operational detail.
- Launching a remote video inspection program in 90 days.
- Virtual building inspections by state — the wider picture.
- What ICC and IBC say about remote inspections.
- San Diego''s virtual inspection program — a city in operation.
What to do while the rules settle
The practical risk for contractors and departments alike is waiting for perfect clarity before changing anything. The elements that will be required under any reasonable interpretation are already knowable: a session that can be tied to a specific address, captures whose time and origin can be checked independently, an unbroken record of who handled each file, and a report that a reviewer can accept without a second visit. None of that is speculative, and building it now costs nothing if the guidance shifts.
Start with one inspection type, write the capture sequence, run it in parallel with your existing process for a few weeks, and keep the evidence in a form you can hand to a reviewer unchanged. Virtual Inspection Pro produces that record automatically — server-side timestamps, location anchored to the geocoded site address, immutable originals with annotations kept as a separate layer, and a complete access log — so readiness becomes a by-product of doing the work rather than a separate compliance project.