• 0
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Shopping Cart

GPAM
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Realtors’ rep sues six cities for failing to adopt state housing plans

California Association of Realtors President Otto Catrina (GAOR, iStock)
California Association of Realtors President Otto Catrina (GAOR, iStock)

A nonprofit group tied to the California Association of Realtors has sued six Southland cities for failing to meet state housing plan deadlines.

Californians for Homeownership filed the lawsuits under new rules that boost penalties for local governments that don’t comply with state laws requiring they plan for their fair share of housing, the Los Angeles Daily News reported.

The group sued the Los Angeles County cities of Bradbury, La Habra Heights, Manhattan Beach, Vernon and South Pasadena, and the Orange County city of Laguna Hills.

The lawsuits asked the courts to require each city to expedite and adopt a compliant housing element. The state housing department would be required to review them within 45 days, with a court order to get them approved.

Under state law, cities must revise the “housing elements” of their general plans every eight years to zone enough land to accommodate state-mandated housing targets at all income levels. In the six-county Southern California Association of Governments region, 197 cities and counties were supposed to complete those revisions by Oct. 15 of last year.

Those that didn’t within 120 days were technically out of compliance and could face penalties, including litigation.

By the end of the grace period on Feb. 11, the state Housing and Community Development Department had approved housing elements for just five cities and one county. Four others have been approved since. At 112 local jurisdictions have completed housing elements now under state review.

The cities included in the Californians for Homeownership complaint were accused of dragging their feet to avoid increased housing targets. Three cities hadn’t submitted draft housing elements for review.
“The goal of these lawsuits is to fundamentally change the way that California’s cities and counties approach their housing planning obligations,”

California Association of Realtors President Otto Catrina said in a statement. “For far too long, cities have treated compliance with these laws as optional, and we hope to put an end to that approach.”

Officials in South Pasadena and Laguna Hills declined to comment to the newspaper, while Bradbury and Vernon did not respond. A La Habra Heights attorney said the city submitted a draft housing element “fully compliant with the law.” A Manhattan Beach spokesperson declined to comment because the city hadn’t been served the complaint.

Faced with rising rents, soaring home prices and high rates of homelessness, state lawmakers start drafting laws in 2017 to address California’s housing crisis. Gov. Gavin Newsom won office in 2018 after vowing to dramatically boost homebuilding across the state.

The state determined the six-county SCAG region must plan for 1.34 million new homes by October 2029 – triple the housing goal for the previous 2013-21 planning cycle.

New rules require greater study of how proposed housing sites could be redeveloped by 2030, especially for low-income housing. New penalties for not complying include withholding a city’s or county’s ability to issue building permits or enforce their zoning laws, with the possibility of litigation and daily fines.

Non-compliant jurisdictions also face the loss of federal and state grants for programs ranging from parks to assistance for building affordable housing.

[Los Angeles Daily News] – Dana Bartholomew

[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]

The post Realtors’ rep sues six cities for failing to adopt state housing plans appeared first on The Real Deal Los Angeles.

Powered by WPeMatico

  • 21 April 2022
  • The Real Deal
  • Uncategorized
  •  Like
Developer aims for apartments with cultural space in Santa Monica →← Developer plans five-story apartment building in Reseda
  • Recent Posts

    • Is CEQA win first shot at a broader overhaul for resi market?   July 5, 2025
    • Hankey finances bargain-bin hotel buy near SF’s Union Square July 3, 2025
    • Industry group flails as CEQA adjustments hit California builders unevenly July 3, 2025
    • Orange County office tower sells for discounted $19M July 3, 2025
    • City to deploy $425M of “mansion tax” money in record spending plan July 3, 2025
  • Recent Comments

    • Archives

      • July 2025
      • June 2025
      • May 2025
      • April 2025
      • March 2025
      • February 2025
      • January 2025
      • December 2024
      • November 2024
      • October 2024
      • September 2024
      • August 2024
      • July 2024
      • June 2024
      • May 2024
      • April 2024
      • March 2024
      • February 2024
      • January 2024
      • December 2023
      • February 2023
      • January 2023
      • December 2022
      • November 2022
      • October 2022
      • September 2022
      • August 2022
      • July 2022
      • June 2022
      • May 2022
      • April 2022
      • March 2022
      • February 2022
      • January 2022
      • December 2021
      • November 2021
      • October 2021
      • September 2021
      • August 2021
      • July 2021
      • June 2021
      • May 2021
      • April 2021
      • March 2021
      • February 2021
      • January 2021
      • December 2020
      • November 2020
      • October 2020
      • September 2020
      • August 2020
      • July 2020
      • June 2020
      • May 2020
      • April 2020
      • March 2020
      • February 2020
      • January 2020
      • December 2019
      • November 2019
      • October 2019
      • September 2019
      • August 2019
      • July 2019
      • June 2019
      • May 2019
      • April 2019
      • March 2019
      • February 2019
      • January 2019
      • December 2018
      • November 2018
      • October 2018
      • September 2018
      • August 2018
      • July 2018
      • June 2018
      • May 2018
      • April 2018
      • March 2018
      • February 2018
      • January 2018
      • December 2017
    • Global Property and Asset Mangement, Inc.
      137 North Larchmont
      Los Angeles, California 90010
      +1 213-427-1127

    © 2025 GPAM