Court orders stay in California’s housing lawsuit against Huntington Beach

Huntington Beach city officials earned a victory in the continued housing battle with Sacramento after a Superior Court judge’s ruling last week.

San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal ruled Thursday that California’s lawsuit against Huntington Beach for violating state housing law must be stayed until a related federal lawsuit against the state filed by City Atty. Michael Gates is decided.

This means that in the meantime, the state cannot levy any penalties against Huntington Beach related to a non-compliant housing element, Gates said.

“It’s a pretty big deal,” he said. “It sort of operates as the temporary restraining order that we sought in federal court.”

Back in March, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and the Department of Housing and Community Development filed suit against Surf City for not accepting new applications for accessory dwelling units. A month later, that suit was amended after the City Council’s conservative majority voted against approving a state-compliant draft housing element.

The plan would have zoned for the required 13,368 units during the current Regional Housing Needs Allocation cycle, which runs until 2029.

“California is in the midst of a housing crisis, and time and time again, Huntington Beach has demonstrated they are part of the problem by defiantly refusing every opportunity to provide essential housing for its own residents,” Bonta said in a statement at the time.

The state’s lawsuit against the city has now been put on hold, however, pending a federal lawsuit filed by the city the same week as Bonta’s original lawsuit. In it, Gates argues that state housing laws violate Huntington Beach’s rights, particularly as a charter city, to zone property.

That federal lawsuit remains pending. The state had filed a motion on June 22 to dismiss it.

“We’re still waiting for the court to weigh in,” Gates said.

In a statement, Huntington Beach Mayor Tony Strickland praised last week’s Superior Court decision.

“I am pleased the court is supporting and defending our city’s rights,” Strickland said. “This is a fundamental fight that we will continue to fight.”