In a move that has sparked considerable debate, Huntington Beach leaders have approved a state-mandated housing plan. This decision comes after years of insisting that the city did not need such a plan, arguing that the approval was made under duress to avoid hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
The approval is timely, as a judge is set to rule on potentially levying new fines against the city. These fines could increase the existing late fees of $50,000 a month to $150,000 a month.
Legal Battles and Financial Pressures
Anthony Taylorone of the city’s contracted lawyers, emphasized that signing off on a housing plan is the city’s best hope to avoid more fines. He noted that as long as the plan is substantially compliantthe city likely wouldn’t see their fees increased.
“Substantial means there’s room for some compromise there,” Taylor said. “There are solid grounds to argue in court there shouldn’t be any more penalties against the city.”
The Fight for Local Control
Multiple city council members insisted this was not the end of their fight for local control and their rights as a charter city. The city has faced repeated court losses before state and federal judges, including both the state and U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to look at the case.
“We will always continue to fight for you and if this path ends, we will pick up a new path,” said Mayor Casey McKeon. “We’re fighting the state in a state court with a state judge under the state seal of California.”
“This is not the final step,” McKeon added.
Councilman Don Kennedy argued that the state had the city “beaten into submission,” and that affordable housing actually increases rents for other renters. “There’s a ripple effect that causes all the outlying cost sets to go up,” Kennedy said. “There are consequences to affordable housing.”
The Measure U Controversy
Councilman Chad Williams contended that the city council does not have the power to approve a new housing plan due to a charter amendment known as Measure U. This measure requires voters to sign off on major amendments to local zoning.
“This council has no authority to declare a law on the books unenforceable, only a court can do that,” Williams said. “The voters passed Measure U knowing the state had sued us. They chose the charter knowing the cost.”
Taylor, however, claimed that Measure U didn’t apply in this case because the city was being forced to adopt a housing plan by a court order. He noted that a judge likely wouldn’t weigh in on the issue.
“There’s nothing before the council this evening that in any way is counter to what the intent of the voters is,” Taylor said. “Everything we’re doing here tonight that’s before the council in this resolution is consistent with the voter’s intent.”
Every other city council member, except for Councilman Andrew Grueldisagreed with Williams. They noted that while they didn’t want to approve the housing plan, they couldn’t risk city coffers getting hit with six-figure fees.
“Notwithstanding Councilman William’s most excellent analysis which I sincerely mean was very good, none of us on this dais have ever gone to law school,” said Councilman Butch Twining. “I’m still going to support this item.”
