San Diego Superior Judge Katherine Bacal has ordered Huntington Beach, also known as Surf City, to adopt a housing element and change its zoning to meet the state-mandated housing plan within 120 days, restricting its zoning authority until they do.
While ordering the city to adopt a housing plan within 120 days, the San Diego Superior Court has also required additional measures which can be found here. The financial penalties the city receives is currently unclear, but could possibly reach fees up to $600,000 a month.
This decision follows Bacal’s initial ruling in May of 2024 that found the city was in violation for not complying with the state’s housing laws. Bacal ruled that they must adopt a housing element with one year to do so, creating over 13,000 new units for that current cycle.
This was the outcome of Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Bonta, and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Director Gustavo Velasquez filing a lawsuit on March 9, 2023 against the city of Huntington Beach for failing to adopt the mandate of building affordable housing.
In response, Surf City leaders filed a federal lawsuit against the state to determine the constitutionality of California housing laws, and an attempt to ultimately end affordable housing mandates altogether.
“Huntington Beach needs to end this pathetic NIMBY behavior,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “They are failing their own citizens by wasting time and money that could be used to create much-needed housing. No more excuses, you lost once again — it’s time to get building.” according to the press release from the State of California Department of Justice.
Under the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and the Housing Element, ultimately requires cities to meet housing needs and are enforced through the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) codified under Assembly Bill (AB) 686, Senate Bills (SB) 9, 35, 423, and the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) which was strengthened under AB 678 and SB 167.
This event coincides with the bigger issue of the recent revitalization and urbanization of California that is heavily concentrated in Southern California (SoCal). Southern California is beginning to lose its small-town coastal beauty and identity, historic districts are under pressure, and these once unique cities are losing their character and becoming identical and mundane.
Recently, there has been controversy and concerns over costly projects about the overwhelmingly high costs with some having little to no work done. Although some of these projects are privately funded, the environment, natural beauty, and history of California are affected.
These include the Dana Point Revitalization Project approximately $600 million, the River Street Market in San Juan Capistrano costing about $70 million, California Forever project that estimates $900 million, and the planned development of the Great Park which is mixed-funded potentially reaching $1.2 billion.
However, significant projects that are funded solely by taxpayer dollars have been severely mismanaged and wasteful, primarily the California high-speed rail put at $128 billion and estimated to increase substantially. Others include the Natomas Upper Westside project, the $6.5 billion reconstruction of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, and the San Juan Capistrano Skatepark that cost around $3.5 million.
It is clear that California is under a significant housing crisis in which many Californians are unable to buy or afford the overwhelmingly high prices. Affordable housing seems like a solution, but still can cost up to $250,000 to $400,000 and depending on location, these prices further increase substantially.
However, it seems counterintuitive in the sense that residents have to pay so much to fund these projects that are directed towards a wealthier audience and the prices of homes and properties surrounding these wealthy, urbanized parts raise the property value substantially.
“Black and Latino families make up 55% of families at or below the 10th percentile…White and Asian families comprise 40% of the lowest-income families and 83% of the highest-income families (52% of all families),” according to Senior Research Associate Tess Thorman and Research Associate Daniel Payares-Montoya for Public Policy Institute for California (PPIC).
Historically, the United States has used the predatory practice of redlining, which has caused minority populations the inability of home ownership. While affordable housing intends to lessen the burden of housing costs, it is further pushing minority populations away from home ownership. Instead, many fear that this has become a new form of redlining that will affect all Californians.
This causes residents to potentially lose their homes due to gentrification or other factors and are unable to search for homes because they are so unaffordable. Typically, if an event occurs, such as the recent Palisades fires or job loss, where you are unable to afford your house then you would just move to a cheaper place, but in California, there is no cheaper place.
“A lot of the residents who plan to sell are elderly or were underinsured when their home burned down, meaning they don’t have the money to rebuild. The rebuilding process has been painstaking for many residents, who have been waiting nearly a year for permits…Vold expects to see more buyers enter the market as insurance stops covering temporary rentals for people whose homes burned down and as more residents give up on the idea of rebuilding,” according to the real estate investors business publication, Rei Ink.
“California’s overall homeownership rate has not changed much in the last three decades…Renters stress is more common in California than in the US,” according to Senior Fellow Hans Johnson and Policy Director and Senior Fellow Eric McGhee in the PPIC.
Additionally, the state is mandating housing without mandating funding for the necessary infrastructure and developer fees. These also do not account for the repercussions such as roads and traffic congestion, lack of proportional emergency services available, rise in already crowded schools, and the shortage in the water supply, prominently in SocCal. These blanket policies that seem desirable ignore community needs.
It is concerning for the next generation because many of these homes, accounting for the population needs and the amount of land, are actually apartments. Housing costs have skyrocketed, infrastructure is struggling, gentrification has displaced several long-term residents, making it seem that these efforts are designed for everyone but those who actually live here.
This raises the question of if citizens will ever be able to even become homeowners, whether or not rent will replace ownership, and who is California truly being built to serve. A state that has officially become the world’s fourth largest economy, recently surpassing Japan, remains extremely difficult for residents to even call home.
