Attachment
Comment Letters
Master Case 21-088
From: [See attached commenter list for June 2021]
Sent: Tuesday, June 2021
To: Mary Cusick
Subject: Santa Clarita housing element update
Hi, my name is [See attached commenter list for June 2021], I am a local carpenters union member. We would like to see Labor standards and or policy included in this plan. In future projects under this plan, the city should explicitly incorporate language requiring family supporting wages, skills training and job access to the community members rather then simply accepting projects founded on low costs and low wages. Specifically:
The construction workforce should require;
‐full family health plans
‐skilled and trained workforce standards through certified apprenticeship ‐paid sick leave. Pension, and vacation‐holiday pay.
High quality responsible bidder standards should be established to ensure high quality construction performance;
‐Construction contractors at every level comply with labor law and have no history of fraudulent or grossly negligent business practices.
‐General contractors should be required to self perform a minimum of 5% of all construction craft work for which they are responsible.
We believe all Santa Clarita residents deserve an innovative economic solution that puts them on the path to build better careers, increase access to family healthcare, and enrich the community at large.
Local Carpenters union member,
[See attached commenter list for June 2021]
List of Commenters from the
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
June 2021
# Name Date Sent
1 Jordan Reyes Peter 6/29/2021
2 Emiliano Guidos 6/29/2021
3 Andrew Gonzalez 6/29/2021
4 Roberto De Paz 6/29/2021
5 Miguel Bedoy 6/29/2021
6 Antonio Zuniga 6/29/2021
7 Javier Hernandez 6/29/2021
8 Douglas Abarca 6/29/2021
9 Tatiana Depaz 6/29/2021
10 Sadie Lopez 6/29/2021
11 Leo Padron 6/29/2021
12 Ivan Jimenez 6/29/2021
13 Alberto Ramirez 6/29/2021
14 Brandon Solorzano 6/29/2021
15 David Hernandez 6/29/2021
16 Michael Cervantes 6/29/2021
17 Edward Mills 6/29/2021
18 Daniel Acosta 6/29/2021
19 Edgar Lara 6/29/2021
20 Andrew Kanamu 6/29/2021
21 Carlos Carbajal 6/29/2021
22 Elias Lopez 6/29/2021
23 Manny Martinez 6/29/2021
24 Josue Gil Zambrano 6/29/2021
25 Felix Campos 6/29/2021
26 Shaun Mieure 6/29/2021
27 Robert Moreno 6/29/2021
28 Alejandro Esqueda 6/29/2021
29 Roberto Villapondo 6/29/2021
30 Ryan Erickson 6/29/2021
31 Oscar Tirado 6/29/2021
32 Danny Gilchrist 6/29/2021
33 Ivan Burgara 6/29/2021
34 Arturo Becerra 6/29/2021
35 Quebin Vargas 6/29/2021
36 Gabriel Castaneda 6/29/2021
37 Yolanda Ochoa 6/29/2021
38 Jason Green 6/29/2021
39 Juan Hernandez 6/29/2021
40 Albert Dominguez 6/29/2021
41 Elias Echevarria 6/29/2021
42 Anibal Rios 6/29/2021
43 Dave Centeno 6/29/2021
44 Martin Sanchez‐Gomez 6/29/2021
45 Jack Rutkowski 6/29/2021
List of Commenters from the
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
June 2021
46 Gustavo Felix 6/29/2021
47 Gianni Rossi 6/29/2021
48 Carlos Jimenez 6/29/2021
49 Carlos Alonso 6/29/2021
50 Enrique Apodaca 6/29/2021
51 Eliseo Jorge 6/29/2021
52 Stephanie Chavez 6/29/2021
53 Erwin Jackson 6/29/2021
54 Carlos Chavez 6/29/2021
55 Ramiro Reyes 6/29/2021
56 Priscilla Caro 6/29/2021
57 Bonifacio Rojas 6/29/2021
58 Aldo Antimo 6/29/2021
59 Katherine Hernandez 6/29/2021
60 Robert Miller 6/29/2021
61 Antonio Munoz 6/29/2021
62 Maria Coronado 6/29/2021
63 Jennifer Bonilla 6/29/2021
64 Crystal Sanchez 6/29/2021
65 Brian Hovet 6/29/2021
66 Franklin Arteta 6/29/2021
67 Alfredo Resendiz 6/29/2021
68 Fidel Espinoza 6/29/2021
69 Brandon Castaneda 6/29/2021
70 Paris Jernigan 6/29/2021
71 Jose Campos 6/29/2021
72 Jonathan Pardo 6/29/2021
73 Tom Cummings 6/29/2021
74 Juan Salazar 6/29/2021
75 Phillip Roberts 6/29/2021
76 Anthony Contreras 6/29/2021
77 Marlon Miranda 6/29/2021
78 Rudy Hernandez 6/29/2021
79 Herbert Hardy 6/29/2021
80 Elias Martinez 6/29/2021
81 Emilio Sandoval 6/29/2021
82 David Lopez 6/29/2021
83 Michael Guzman 6/29/2021
84 Bonifacio Rojas 6/29/2021
85 David Benzie 6/29/2021
86 Joel Perez 6/30/2021
87 Alex Sonne 6/30/2021
88 Daniel Langford 6/30/2021
89 Oscar Vargas 6/29/2021
90 Trishton Belisle 6/29/2021
91 Sean Mann 6/30/2021
List of Commenters from the
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
June 2021
92 Joseph Ledesma 6/29/2021
93 Angel Tirado 6/29/2021
94 Josselyn Tirado 6/29/2021
95 Nicolas Reyes 6/29/2021
96 Katrina Powell 6/29/2021
97 Carolina Corona 6/29/2021
98 Kory Smith 6/29/2021
99 Ramiro Reyes 6/29/2021
100 Genoveva Reyes 6/29/2021
101 Consuelo Martinez 6/29/2021
102 Andres Martinez 6/29/2021
103 Jose Martinez 6/29/2021
104 Joe Ledesma 6/29/2021
105 Yvonne Vargas 6/29/2021
106 Pablo Ochoa 6/29/2021
107 Jeffrey Carranza 6/29/2021
108 Natali Mendoza 6/29/2021
109 Juan Medina 6/29/2021
110 Jesus Rodriguez 6/29/2021
111 Carlos Barrillas 6/29/2021
112 Eduardo Desantiago 6/29/2021
113 Madelio Vaca 6/29/2021
114 Neysa Gonzalez 6/29/2021
115 Luba Mirazadeh 6/29/2021
116 Michael Cabrera 6/29/2021
117 Stephenie Leiva 6/29/2021
118 Casey Lorenzen 6/29/2021
119 Corey Crockerham 6/29/2021
120 Ruben Anguiano 6/29/2021
121 Baldo Lopez 6/29/2021
122 Eduardo Desantiago 6/29/2021
123 Roberto Leiva 6/29/2021
124 Angel Martinez 6/29/2021
125 Gonzalo Vasquez 6/29/2021
126 Jose Salcedo 6/29/2021
127 Luis Jauregui 6/29/2021
128 Omar Arellano 6/29/2021
129 Anthony Cardona 6/29/2021
130 Blake Powell 6/29/2021
131 Rebeca Galindo 6/29/2021
132 German Guitron 6/29/2021
133 Mike Ortiz 6/29/2021
134 Alex Ortiz 6/29/2021
135 Carlos Perez 6/29/2021
136 George Duenas 6/29/2021
137 Denis A. 6/30/2021
List of Commenters from the
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
June 2021
138 Susan Fuchs 6/30/2021
139 Robert Milewsky 6/30/2021
140 Byron Murray 6/30/2021
141 Eduardo Torres Garcia 6/30/2021
142 Jerred Langford 6/30/2021
143 Salvador Camacho 6/30/2021
144 David Copado 6/30/2021
145 Michael Marquez 6/30/2021
146 Ryan Jefferson 6/30/2021
147 Max Garcia Torres 6/30/2021
148 Andy Estrada 6/30/2021
149 Israel Pablo De Paz 6/30/2021
150 Anthonio Pablo 6/30/2021
151 Liliana Gomez 6/30/2021
152 Jorge Preciado 6/30/2021
153 Ron Diament 7/1/2021
154 Mike Simnowski 6/30/2021
155 Martin Virgen 6/30/2021
156 Yesenia Lopez 6/30/2021
157 Antonio Zamora 6/30/2021
158 Salina Guzman 6/30/2021
159 Leonel Serrano 6/30/2021
160 Alfredo Tapia 6/30/2021
161 Charles Lugo 6/30/2021
162 Cesar Banuelos 6/30/2021
163 Tim Glynn 7/1/2021
From: [See attached commenter list for April 2022]
Sent: April 2022
To: [email protected]
Subject: Santa Clarita housing element update
Hi, my name is [See attached commenter list for April 2022], I am a local carpenters union member. We would like to see Labor Standards and or policy included in this plan. In future projects under this plan, the city should explicitly incorporate language requiring family supporting wages, skills training and job access to the community members rather then simply accepting projects founded on low costs and low wages. Specifically:
The construction workforce should require;
‐Full family health plans
‐Skilled and trained workforce standards through certified apprenticeship ‐Paid sick leave. Pension, and vacation‐holiday pay.
High quality responsible bidder standards should be established to ensure high quality construction performance;
‐Construction contractors at every level comply with labor law and have no history of fraudulent or grossly negligent business practices.
‐ General Contractors should be required to self perform a Minimum of 5% of all construction craft work for which they are responsible.
We believe all Santa Clarita residents deserve an innovative economic solution that puts them on the path to build better careers, increase access to family healthcare, and enrich the community at large.
Local Carpenters Union Member,
[See attached commenter list for April 2022]
List of Commenters from the
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
April 2022
# Name Date Sent
1 Jose Tapia 4/4/2022
2 Andruw Aguilar 4/4/2022
3 Jose Gorrochotegui 4/5/2022
4 Rolando Galaviz 4/4/2022
5 Alexis Ramos 4/5/2022
6 Irvin Avelino 4/5/2022
7 Oscar Enciso 4/5/2022
8 Gustavo Ramirez Guerrero 4/5/2022
9 Carolos Ortega 4/5/2022
10 Mario Ramirez 4/5/2022
11 Carlos Cortez 4/5/2022
12 Clifford Kellgreen 4/5/2022
13 Jorge Barnadac 4/5/2022
14 Justin Alvarado 4/5/2022
15 Alfredo Hernandez 4/4/2022
16 Oscar Nunez 4/4/2022
17 Shane Lau 4/4/2022
18 Luis Jovel 4/4/2022
19 Alex Calderon 4/4/2022
20 Robert Hagen 4/4/2022
21 Omar Nevarez 4/4/2022
22 Robert Hagen 4/4/2022
23 Julian Jimenez 4/4/2022
24 Jose Hernandez 4/4/2022
25 Parker Pilney 4/4/2022
26 Christopher Larios 4/4/2022
27 Anthony Thompson 4/5/2022
28 Anthony Thompson 4/5/2022
29 Pedro Vizcaino 4/5/2022
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: [email protected]
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101
VIA E-MAIL
November 23, 2021
Mary Cusick, City Clerk
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 120
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Em: [email protected]
RE: City of Santa Clarita’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update.
Dear Mary Cusick,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Southwest Carpenter” or “SWRCC”), my Office is submitting these comments for the City of Santa Clarita’s (“City”) draft 2021-2029 update to the City’s General Plan Housing Element (“Project”).
The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing 50,000 union carpenters in six states, including California, and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.
Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work and recreate in the City and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s environmental impacts.
SWRCC expressly reserves the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.
SWRCC incorporates by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties).
City of Santa Clarita – 6th Cycle Housing Element Update November 23, 2021
Moreover, SWRCC requests that the City provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s governing body.
The City should require the use of a local skilled and trained workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment. The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California.
Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.
Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce City of Santa Clarita – 6th Cycle Housing Element Update November 23, 2021
Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words, well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and moving California closer to its climate targets.1
Local skilled and trained workforce requirements and policies have significant environmental benefits since they improve an area’s jobs-housing balance, decreasing the amount of and length of job commutes and their associated greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.” 3 In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its Downtown area to requiring that the City “c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs, . .
1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions, available at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/
Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10 3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General_Plan_FINAL.pdf.
City of Santa Clarita – 6th Cycle Housing Element Update November 23, 2021
.”4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits. .
As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:
People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced communities and their vehicle trips would be shor ter. Benefits would include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to those held by local residents.
7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:
In nearly bu ilt-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents, especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than 3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about
4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown% 20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C). 6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs- housing.pdf
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs- Housing Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT- 825.pdf.
City of Santa Clarita – 6th Cycle Housing Element Update November 23, 2021
negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of approval for development permits.
The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality and transportation impacts.
Sincerely,
______________________
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorneys for Southwest Regional
Council of Carpenters
Attached:
March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A); Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B); and Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C).
DOC 6409458.SCV
December 20, 2021
Ref. DOC 6364670
Mr. James Chow, Senior Planner
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Mr. Chow:
Response to Santa Clarita Housing Element
The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (District) received a notice for the subject project on November 3, 2021. The City of Santa Clarita (City) is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (District). We offer the following comments regarding sewerage service:
1. The District own, operate, and maintain the large trunk sewers that form the backbone of the regional wastewater conveyance system. Local collector and/or lateral sewer lines are the responsibility of the jurisdiction in which they are located. As such, the District cannot comment on any deficiencies in the sewerage system in the City except to state that presently no deficiencies exist in District’ s facilities that serve the City. F or information on deficiencies in the City sewerage system, please contact the City Department of Public Works and/or the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.
2. The District should review individual developments within the City to determine whether sufficient trunk sewer capacity exists to serve each project and if District’s facilities will be affected by the project.
3. The District operates two water reclamation plants (WRPs), the Saugus WRP and the Valencia WRP, which provide wastewater treatment in the Santa Clarita Valley. These facilities are interconnected to form a regional treatment system known as the Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System (SCVJSS). The SCVJSS has a capacity of 28.1 million gallons per day ( mgd) and currently processes an average flow of
19.6 mgd.
4. In order to estimate the volume of wastewater the project will generate, go to www.lacsd.org , under Services, then Wastewater Programs and Permits, select Will Serve Program , and scroll down to click on the Table 1, Loadings for Each Class of Land Use link for a copy of the District ’s average wastewater generation factors.
5. The District is empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee to connect facilities (directly or indirectly) to the District’s Sewerage System or to increase the strength or quantity of wastewater discharged from connected facilities. This connection fee is used by the District for its capital facilities. Payment of a connection fee may be required before this project is permitted to discharge to the District’s Sewerage System. For more information and a copy of the Connection Fee Information Sheet, go to www.lacsd.org, under Services, then Wastewater (Sewage) and select Rates & Fees. In determining the impact to the Sewerage System and applicable connection fees, the District will determine the user category (e.g. Condominium, Single Family home, etc.) that best represents the actual or anticipated use of the parcel(s) or facilities on the parcel(s) in the development. For more specific information regarding the
Mr. James Chow 2 December 20, 2021
DOC 6409458.SCV
connection fee application procedure and fees, the developer should contact the District’s Wastewater Fee Public Counter at (562) 908-4288, extension 2727.
6. In order for the District to conform to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the capacities of the District’s wastewater treatment facilities are based on the regional growth forecast adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Specific policies included in the development of the SCAG regional growth forecast are incorporated into clean air plans, which are prepared by the South Coast and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Districts in order to improve air quality in the South Coast and Mojave Desert Air Basins as mandated by the CAA. All expansions of District’s facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner that will be consistent with the SCAG regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The available capacity of the District’s treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to levels associated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such, this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise the developer that the District intends to provide this service up to the levels t hat are legally permitted and to inform the developer of the currently existing capacity and any proposed expansion of District’s facilities.
If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 908-4288, extension 2743 or [email protected].
Very truly yours,
Mandy Huffman
Environmental Planner
Facilities Planning Department
MNH:mnh
MATTHEW GELFAND, COUNSEL
[email protected]
TEL: (213) 739-8206
March 24, 2022
Tom Cole
City of Santa Clarita
Email: [email protected]
RE: Santa Clarita’s failure to timely adopt a Sixth Cycle Housing Element.
Dear Tom Cole:
Californians for Homeownership is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that uses impact litigation to address California’s housing crisis. We are monitoring local compliance with the law governing housing elements. Our understanding is that the City has not adopted a sixth cycle housing element, which it was required to do by October 15, 2021. 1 It also missed the second compliance deadline of February 12, 2022, subjecting it to additional penalties.2 We are currently preparing for litigation against cities that have not timely adopted housing elements, like yours.
In light of the City’s failure to timely adopt its housing element, our organization could immediately sue the City under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 to compel it to adopt a compliant housing element.3 As a result of this litigation, in addition to being ordered to adopt a housing element on a short timeline, 4 the City could also face a number of serious penalties. For example, the court could suspend all non-residential permitting, 5 or could judicially approve housing development projects within the City.6 And the court could impose these penalties while the litigation is pending, even before reaching a final decision.7 Housing element litigation is given priority in the court system, 8 and a successful plaintiff can obtain attorneys’ fees under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021.5. Indeed, in a recent case involving the City of Huntington Beach’s housing element, a court awarded another non-profit organization over $3.5 million in fees.9 The purpose of this letter is to offer the City a pathway to avoid immediate litigation by our organization. Enclosed is an Acknowledgment that sets forth some of the penalties to which the City is currently subject in light of the City’s failure to adopt a housing element. If the City signs and returns the Acknowledgment, we will not initiate litigation against the City at this time. 1 Gov. Code § 65588(e)(3).
2 Gov. Code §§ 65583(c)(1)(A), 65583.2(c), and 65588(e)(4)(C). 3 Gov. Code §§ 65587, 65751.
4 Gov. Code § 65754.
5 Gov. Code § 65755(a)(1).
6 Gov. Code § 65755(a)(4).
7 Gov. Code § 65757.
8 Gov. Code § 65752.
9 https://www.communitylegalsocal.org/kennedy-commission-awarded-3-5-million-in-attorneys-fees-for-advocacy- in-huntington-beach-low-income-housing-case/
March 24, 2022
We ask that you return the Acknowledgement by April 1, 2022. If you decline to do so, understand that we may initiate litigation against the City, using the City’s refusal to acknowledge these basic requirements of state housing law to demonstrate the existence of a dispute necessitating judicial intervention. As part of the litigation, we would likely seek a judicial declaration that the City is subject to the same penalties described in the Acknowledgment, among other remedies. We have dedicated in-house resources sufficient to maintain at least 10 simultaneous housing element lawsuits as part of our commitment to enforcing this important aspect of state housing law.
Finally, while we acknowledge that it takes a significant dedication of resources to comply with the requirements of state housing element law, it is worth noting that many cities throughout the Southern California (SCAG) region, both big and small, have already adopted their sixth cycle housing elements after fully complying with state law mandates governing consultation with the public and the state Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). We believe that, with appropriate planning, all of the SCAG cities could have adopted their housing elements by the October 15, 2021 deadline. For this reason, it would not be productive to respond to this letter by listing the steps the City has taken towards adoption, or the obstacles it has faced. Instead, we simply ask that the City sign the Acknowledgment. There are no statutory exceptions to the penalties identified in the Acknowledgment, and HCD does not have the authority to excuse the City from them.
We look forward to receiving the signed Acknowledgment. If you would like to discuss any of this with me, please do not hesitate to give me a call at (213) 739-8206.
Sincerely,
Matthew Gelfand
cc: Joseph Montes, Esq., City Attorney (by email to [email protected])
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The City of Santa Clarita hereby acknowledges that it has not timely adopted a sixth cycle revised housing element of its general plan within the deadline set forth in Government Code Section 65588, and that its housing element is therefore not in substantial compliance with Article
10.6 of the Government Code. As a result, the City is subject to the following:
1. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65583(c)(1)(A), 65583.2(c), and 65588(e)(4)(C), the City will be required to complete any rezoning required under housing element law in connection with the City’s sixth cycle housing element by October 15, 2022.
2. The City is currently prohibited from rejecting housing development projects based on subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(5) of the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), Government Code Section 65589.5. The City acknowledges that this means that, unless another exception within subdivision (d) applies, the City is prohibited from using its general plan and zoning standards to reject a proposal that meets the affordability requirements described in subdivision (h)(3) of the HAA.
The public, including without limitation any applicant to develop any project involving residential units, may rely on this Acknowledgment as the City’s binding commitment to comply with the provisions of state law described above.
DATED: ________________, 2022 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
By: _____________________________
[Signature]
_____________________________
[Name]
Its: _____________________________
[Title]