The La Cañada Flintridge City Council agreed after a closed session meeting Tuesday that the city might be exposed to litigation from the state surrounding the denial of the 600 Foothill Boulevard project, which plans to build multi-unit housing on the site.
The city received a notice of violation from the state Department of Housing and Community Development on June 8.
The letter, which was made available to the public Monday and put on the special agenda for the June 20 closed session Council meeting, claims that the city is in violation of State Housing Element Law and the Housing Accountability Act.
“This violation occurred when the city, despite technical assistance from HCD, denied an appeal related to the application of the housing project at 600 Foothill Boulevard (Project),” the letter stated. “The city did so by adopting Resolution 23-14, which purports to uphold the Planning Division’s incompleteness determination for the project application, issued on March 1.”
Based on HCD’s review, the city’s reasons for denying the project are “flawed,” and the letter emphasized that the city incorrectly determined that the Oct. 4 housing element was in substantial compliance with the state housing element law, and its subsequent actions are unsupported by the law.
“The city cannot ‘backdate’ its housing element compliance date to an earlier date so as to avoid approving a Builder’s Remedy application,” read the letter.
“In short, the October 4, 2022, Adopted Housing Element did not substantially comply with State Housing Element Law, regardless of any declaration by the city. Therefore, the Builder’s Remedy applies, and the city’s denial of the project application based on inconsistency with zoning and land use designation is a violation of the HAA. HCD further reminds the city that, as of the date of this letter, the city remains out of compliance with Housing Element Law unless and until it completes statutorily required rezoning.”
A builder’s remedy is a way to expedite the construction of low- or middle-income housing when a municipality fails to comply with state laws related to housing development.
Since the city does not have substantially compliant housing element, according to HCD, the city may not disapprove an affordable housing project since the city has not finished their zoning and land use designation.
The preliminary application for the 600 Foothill Boulevard project was submitted on Nov. 14, which was when the city’s housing element was not in compliance, according to the state, and could not deny the project.
“The city has until June 22, 2023, to provide a written response to this notice,” read the letter. “HCD will consider any written response before taking further action … including, but not limited to, referral to the California Office of the Attorney General.”
LCF resident David Haxton spoke to the Council before their closed session meeting to discuss the June 8 letter.
“I pointed out that you were ignoring the letter that the state had sent the city merely a week earlier,” said Haxton, talking about a May 1 special Council meeting. “It was the elephant in the room, yet you and staff never even mentioned the letter.”
Four things went wrong with the LCF housing element, Haxton said, that resulted in the city still not having a compliant and approved housing element.
The four things he listed included an understaffed planning department, consultants that didn’t know what they were doing, bad legal advice and leadership, Haxton said.
“You’ve known since you started the housing element in Jan. 2021 that you need to create some new zoning and rezone properties,” said Haxton. “But two-and-half years later, no such zoning issues have even been presented to the planning commission.”
“The blame entirely lies with you,” he continued. “You have not made the housing element a priority. You haven’t provided staff with the consultants it needs. You followed bad advice and made a stupid decision to ignore the state.”
City Attorney Adrian Guerra gave a recap after the closed session meeting.
“The purpose of this closed session is for the City Council to determine based on existing facts and circumstances whether there is a significant exposure to litigation against the city. The facts and circumstances consist of a notice to the city dated June 8, 2023, from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, where HCD alleges that the city is in violation of state Housing Element Law and the Housing Accountability Act.”
The City Council, excluding Mayor Pro Tem Richard Gunter who was absent, decided that the June 8 letter constituted an exposure of litigation to the city.
EXISITING LITIGATION
The City Council also discussed a lawsuit in their closed session titled “Californians for Homeownership Inc. v. City of La Cañada Flintridge.”
“Californians for Homeownership is a nonprofit organization that works to address California’s housing crisis by enforcing these laws and fighting unlawful policies that limit access to housing affordable for families at all income levels,” reads the Californians for Homeownership mission statement.
The 62-page document goes into detail on how the city of LCF has failed to complete its housing element rezoning programs, the denial of the 600 Foothill project and the city missing various deadlines for their housing element.
“Beyond the city’s technical arguments on this issue, all of which are addressed above, the crux of the city’s argument seems to be this: because the city has committed to rezoning soon, it is substantially compliant,” read the document. “This view [has] no basis in the law and runs directly counter to the legislature’s intent that the rezoning deadline penalty be enforced to deter late adoption of housing elements by local governments.”
No action was taken regarding the Californians for Homeownership lawsuit during the closed session meeting, Guerra said.
The hearing for this lawsuit will take place on June 27, and members of the 600 Foothill project will be present.
EXTENSIONS
At the regular City Council meeting on June 20, the Council approved a consent calendar item that had to do with granting extensions to planning entitlements, building plan checks and municipal permits associated with multifamily and mixed-use projects.
“I think this does a lot to show that we’re a pro housing, especially multifamily community. This helps those [who] were in process that had permits pulled and approved by allowing them a further extension at no cost to them,” said Mayor Keith Eich. “So I think this is just a great thing on our city’s part.”
During the last bit of the meeting Eich reminded the community about the importance of rezoning.
“Rezoning is the most important thing on the docket,” said Eich. “I kept telling Mark before he left that it’s the most important thing. I know we have to run a city, but we got to get that done and I have faith that we’ll get it done in due time.”
First published in the June 22 print issue of the Outlook Valley Sun.
