by Garth Meyer
Was state Senate Bill 9’s goal to create affordable housing defined sufficiently to override the authority of Redondo Beach and four other California cities, who sued the state saying it was not?
Superior Court of Los Angeles agreed with the cities on April 22, in a ruling of potential statewide significance.
Judge Curtis A. Kin found “SB9 is neither reasonably related to ensuring access to affordable housing, nor narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary interference in local governance.”
Judge Kin’s decision makes it so the 2022 state law does not apply to Redondo Beach, Torrance, Carson, Whittier and Del Mar — the cites who sued – and possibly 117 other charter cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego.
Under state law, charter cities have more autonomy.
“We’re extremely pleased. It was an overreach by the state,” said Mike Webb, Redondo Beach city attorney. “It violated the home-rule provision (for charter cities) and it wouldn’t have led to affordable housing. Judge Kin’s very well-reasoned opinion protects local control over local zoning.”
State Attorney General Rob Bonta led the respondents in the case.
Judge Kin said their view lacked in certain areas.
“(They) present no evidence to support the assertion that the upzoning permitted by SB9 would result in any increase in the supply of below market-rate housing,” the judge wrote. “… In order to justify SB9’s interference with the municipal concerns of land use and zoning regulations, the Legislature cannot rely on a potential, eventual decrease in prices resulting from increased housing supply, to demonstrate that SB9 would increase the (amount) of affordable (below market-rate) housing.”
The Court also stated, however, that “the power of a charter city to govern its municipal affairs must give way when the state enacts a statute that is reasonably tailored to the resolution of a subject of statewide concern.”
SB9 obligates California cities to approve residential lot splits unless they violate public health and/or safety or the environment. The bill requires an owner to live on the property at least three years after the split.
In a statement after last week’s ruling, SB9’s author, state Sen. Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) said the judge’s verdict was “sadly misguided” and vowed to “remedy any loopholes biased city governments might utilize” to block new housing.
“The assertion by NIMBY city governments that SB9 is only about subsidized housing is a stretch at best. The goal of SB9 has always been to increase equity and accessibility in our neighborhoods while growing our housing supply and production across the state. (The bill) promotes small-scale neighborhood residential development by streamlining the process for a homeowner to create a duplex or subdivide an existing lot.”
In Judge Kin’s summation, he noted that the case was not about the Legislature’s ability to create legislation to promote affordable housing, or “the different concern” of a general statewide housing shortage.
“However, because the provisions of SB9 are not reasonably related and sufficiently narrowly tailored to the explicit stated purpose of that legislation – namely, to ensure access to affordable housing – SB9 cannot stand, and the writ petition must be granted.”
So will this affect more cities than those who sued?
“It certainly applies to the five plaintiff cities,” Webb said. “And could potentially apply to all 121 charter cities in the state depending upon the wording of the judgment and subsequent proceedings in the case.”
The lawsuit asked for all SB9 applications in charter cities to cease, in a second part of the case which the judge has not yet taken up.
“We have to decide if we want to dismiss that,” Webb said. “If we dismiss it, it is because we don’t believe it is needed.”
This decision is to be made by Webb and the four other city attorneys, along with the law firm representing them.
Redondo Beach has had just one SB9 application in the two years since the law took effect.
“Our lot sizes are smaller, and it’s hard to make those work,” said Sean Scully, city planning manager. “We just have not seen those projects.”
He noted that accessory-dwelling units (ADUs) are much more common. Redondo has averaged 40 applications per year for the past three years.
————————————–
“Our Neighborhood Voices” continues push for constitutional amendment
The court win over SB9 comes at a time in which ‘Our Neighborhood Voices,” an effort to put a statewide constitutional amendment on the ballot, moves forward. “Our Neighborhood Voices” was co-founded by the late Redondo Beach Mayor Bill Brand.
The group seeks a constitutional amendment to put/keep cities in charge of land use and local zoning laws.
“It’s absolutely still needed,” said Mike Webb, Redondo Beach city attorney. “This was a very important victory in the short term, but in the long term, a constitutional amendment is needed to protect local zoning…”
Redondo Councilman Nils Nehrenheim is a leader in the push.
“The SB9 ruling energizes Our Neighborhood Voices. We are not just on the right track showing that Sacramento is not producing legislation for affordable housing, but Sacramento legislators are destroying communities for Wall Street profits,” Nehrenheim said. “Our support is expanding every week and this ruling supports our supporters like our Assemblymember, Al Muratsuchi, and hundreds of other locally elected officials around the state.” ER
