English Bulldog Puppies for Sale in Huntington Beach, CA

What you need to know: The federal court of appeals today denied Huntington Beach’s NIMBY attempt to sue the state for enforcing state law that requires the city to build its fair share of housing. California will continue to hold the city accountable and ensure that it builds the housing its community deserves.

SACRAMENTO — In March 2023, the state sued Huntington Beach for violating various state housing laws. The city retaliated by suing the state in federal court, arguing that enforcing California’s laws requiring cities to build more housing was unconstitutional. Today the Ninth Circuit affirmed the trial court in rejecting Huntington Beach’s NIMBY lawsuit.

“Today, yet another court has slapped down Huntington Beach’s cynical attempt to prevent the state from enforcing our housing laws. Huntington Beach officials’ continued efforts to advance plainly unlawful NIMBY policies are failing their own citizens — by wasting time and taxpayer dollars that could be used to create much-needed housing. No more excuses — every city must follow state law and do its part to build more housing.”

Governor Gavin Newsom

“I am pleased that yet another court has emphatically rejected Huntington Beach’s attempt to exempt itself from state housing laws,” said Attorney General Bonta. “While the City has been wasting the public’s time and money pursuing this meritless lawsuit, its neighboring communities — along with every Californian struggling to keep a roof over their heads or wondering where they’re going to sleep tonight — need Huntington Beach to step up and adopt a housing plan without further delay. My office will continue pursuing all remedies in the state case against the City, where the court has already determined the City violated the state’s Housing Element Law.”

Today, California secured a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirming the district court’s dismissal of the City of Huntington Beach’s federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of enforcing state housing laws.

In 2023, the Governor announced that California was suing the city, arguing that the city is in violation of the state Housing Element Law and seeking both penalties and injunctive relief.

A copy of the decision can be found here.

LOS ANGELES (CN) — A Ninth Circuit panel on Wednesday sided with the state of California in its legal battle with the city of Huntington Beach over laws that force it to build more housing.

Last year, a federal judge found that the city and its officials lacked standing to bring the complaint. A Ninth Circuit three-judge panel agreed, citing previous case law that “forbids political subdivisions and their officials from challenging the constitutionality of state statutes in federal court.”

“Today, yet another court has slapped down Huntington Beach’s cynical attempt to prevent the state from enforcing our housing laws," said California Governor Gavin Newsom in a written statement. "Huntington Beach officials’ continued efforts to advance plainly unlawful NIMBY policies are failing their own citizens — by wasting time and taxpayer dollars that could be used to create much-needed housing."

Huntington Beach had argued that its status as a charter city means that it isn’t a “political subdivision,” but the panel remained unmoved, writing in its terse, four-page ruling, “No matter how California categorizes charter cities, they remain subordinate political bodies, not sovereign entities."

In a phone interview, Huntington Beach City Attorney Michael Gates said that based on the hearing for the appeal, he wasn't surprised at the ruling, though he was surprised at its brevity. He called the decision "a misapprehension or misapplication of the law," which he said was a basis for en banc review, which the city will ask for. If that fails, he said, the city will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

"Council members have made it very clear, we’re going the distance on this," Gates said.

In an effort to ease its stubborn housing crisis, California has passed a slew of laws to incentivize construction and to require cities to change their zoning rules so more homes can be built. A number of cities have fought those new laws, including Huntington Beach — or "surf city," as it is fond of calling itself, either by suing the state or by simply ignoring the new rules and waiting for the state sue. Newson has called Huntington Beach "Exhibit A of what NIMBYism looks like," referring to the phrase "Not in My Backyard," a derisive term for people and groups who fight new development.

In March 2023, California sued Huntington Beach over its refusal to legalize accessory dwelling units — sometimes called ADUs or granny flats — on properties zoned for single-family homes, claiming that city officials had showed a "willful intentional refusal to follow laws." A day later, Huntington Beach countersued California over a number of housing laws, which it called "an unbridled power play to control all aspects of the City Council’s land use decisions in order to eliminate the suburban character of the city and replace it with a high-density mecca."

The city added in its complaint: "This will be done through the forced rezoning for high-density housing, including allowing developers to construct high-density projects leaving the City Council with no discretion to deny or condition invasive high-density development."

Among the laws being sued over was the housing element, a blueprint that every city must put together for how it plans to foster construction of a certain amount of housing units. Huntington Beach must produce a housing element that allows for 13,000 additional units. In May, a Superior Court Judge in San Diego ruled that Huntington Beach was flouting the housing element law.

“While the city has been wasting the public’s time and money pursuing this meritless lawsuit," said California Attorney General Rob Bonta in a written statement on Wednesday, "its neighboring communities — along with every Californian struggling to keep a roof over their heads or wondering where they’re going to sleep tonight — need Huntington Beach to step up and adopt a housing plan without further delay."

Gates said the Ninth Circuit's ruling would have "disastrous effects."

"The state is basically commandeering local decision making," he said.

Follow @hillelaron

Categories / Appeals, Government, Regional

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

A federal appeals court has ruled against Huntington Beach in its ongoing fight against state housing mandates.

The Orange County beach city has long refused to follow state laws that address the housing crisis.

Huntington Beach’s conservative City Council majority voted in March 2023 to sue the state over its mandate to zone for 13,368 new units in the current cycle, including a percentage of low-income housing.

Advertisement

City Atty. Michael Gates said at the time that state mandates could not have preemptive power over Huntington Beach’s authority as a charter city. Charter cities adopt a voter-approved set of governing rules that give them more say over local affairs.

The state filed a motion to dismiss Huntington Beach’s federal lawsuit, and U.S. District Judge Fred Slaughter in November 2023 granted that motion.

In Wednesday’s two-page decision, the three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that “no matter how California categorizes charter cities, they remain subordinate political bodies, not sovereign entities.”

Advertisement

They also ruled that Huntington Beach and City Atty. Michael Gates did not have standing to sue in federal court, echoing the initial ruling last year by the district judge.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta praised the decision in a statement Wednesday.

“While the city has been wasting the public’s time and money pursuing this meritless lawsuit, its neighboring communities — along with every Californian struggling to keep a roof over their heads or wondering where they’re going to sleep tonight — need Huntington Beach to step up and adopt a housing plan without further delay,” Bonta said. “My office will continue pursuing all remedies in the state case against the city, where the court has already determined the city violated the state’s housing element law.”

The related lawsuit brought by California against the city is also in appellate court, in San Diego.

Advertisement

“Today, yet another court has slapped down Huntington Beach’s cynical attempt to prevent the state from enforcing our housing laws,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “Huntington Beach officials’ continued efforts to advance plainly unlawful NIMBY policies are failing their own citizens — by wasting time and taxpayer dollars that could be used to create much-needed housing. No more excuses — every city must follow state law and do its part to build more housing.”

Gates said Wednesday that he wasn’t surprised by the decision based on how the hearing went, though he obviously disagreed.

“There are almost innumerable number of California court decisions that hold that charter cities are not political subdivisions,” he said. “It’s really a misapprehension of the law and a misapplication of the law.”

He said the city could next petition for “en banc,” or full panel, review or could try to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if that review was denied.

Huntington Beach lost its primary lawsuit against California’s housing mandates in federal appeals court today after the Ninth Circuit Court issued a ruling that they didn’t have the power to sue the state.

The lawsuit has been ongoing since March 9, 2023, when city council members and Gov. Gavin Newsom announced competing lawsuits against one another on the same day, debating whether or not the city needed to have a state approved housing development plan.

[Read: California’s Battle With Huntington Beach Over Housing Goals Heads To Court]

While Attorney General Rob Bonta sued the city in state court to compel them to adopt a housing plan, HB City Attorney Michael Gates sued back in federal court, claiming that charter cities like Surf City were not bound by regular state laws.

It was an argument the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with in their ruling, who agreed with another ruling by U.S. District Judge Fred Slaughter, who threw the case out last year, arguing the city didn’t have standing to sue the state on this issue.

[Read: Federal Judge Tosses Surf City Lawsuit Against CA Housing Mandate]

“We are not persuaded by the City’s effort,” the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges wrote in their Wednesday ruling. “No matter how California categorizes charter cities, they remain subordinate political bodies, not sovereign entities.”

To read the full ruling, click here.

Gates has also lost in state court against Bonta, with San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal requiring the city to write a new plan for housing.

[Read: Huntington Beach Loses Housing Mandate Lawsuit Against California]

In a Wednesday interview, Gates said the decision was “not particularly surprising,” and said he would be asking the Ninth Circuit to do a second review.

If that review is denied, he plans to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which he says city council members have already told him they want.

“City Council has made it pretty clear we’ll take this all the way to the Supreme Court,” Gates said. “That’s their intent so I know that’s an option.”

In a news release Wednesday evening, Bonta praised the decision by the court.

“I am pleased that yet another court has emphatically rejected Huntington Beach’s attempt to exempt itself from state housing laws,” Bonta said. “While the City has been wasting the public’s time and money pursuing this meritless lawsuit, its neighboring communities — along with every Californian struggling to keep a roof over their heads or wondering where they’re going to sleep tonight — need Huntington Beach to step up and adopt a housing plan without further delay.”

In a post on X, Newsom’s office had a short comment on the ruling. “No more excuses,” Newsom’s governor account posted. “Every city must follow state law and do its part to build more housing.”

Noah Biesiada is a Voice of OC reporter and corps member with Report for America, a GroundTruth initiative. Contact him at nbiesiada@voiceofoc.org or on Twitter @NBiesiada.

•••

Can you support Voice of OC with a donation?

You obviously care about local news and value good journalism here in Orange County. With your support, we can bring you more stories like these.

Donate Today!

About Voice of OC: Mission | Editorial Policies | Contact Us | Funding | Privacy Policy

Join the conversation: In lieu of comments, we encourage readers to engage with us across a variety of mediums. Join our Facebook discussion. Message us via our website or staff page. Send us a secure tip. Share your thoughts in a community opinion piece.

A group of Huntington Beach residents known as "Protect HB" said they've gathered enough valid signatures to try repealing a new ordinance that could impact which books are put on public library shelves.

More than 15,000 people have signed a petition that's headed to the city clerk. If valid, voters will decide whether the city council majority's community parent-garden review board will exist. It has the power to decide which library books are purchased and can pull children's books that it deems inappropriate.

"The books that they have relocated are currently puberty books," said Friends of HB Libary board member Carol Daus. "Books that had any form of nudity that they didn't feel comfortable with so that would be potty training books for example. Those have been moved way up to the fourth floor in an adult section, which I think is inappropriate."

City Council member Rhonda Bolton is one of the three members who voted against the review board.

"If you do look at legal jurisprudence, what that says is even moving a book from the children's section to the adult section is censorship," she said. "That's what the law says. So, I'm not going to advise anyone to do something that's not legal."

If the issue goes on the ballot, resident Katie Casper will dig deeper to find out more.

"Probably doing a little bit of research on who is appointing these members to the committee," she said.

Mayor Gracey Van Der Mark, who supports the board, said the city "will respect the will of the voters," if the committee is eliminated.

"But as of right now, the current city council majority has done a stellar job in protecting and preserving our award winning libraries," she wrote.

The signatures will be turned in to the city clerk to be counted on Monday. After, it will go to Orange County's Registrar of Voters to validate the signature.

Once that process finishes a special election will then be called likely for March of 2025.

Michele Gile

Michele joined KCAL9 in 1990 as the Orange County reporter and she has loved it there ever since! She reports from the field for both KCAL9 and CBS2.

Twitter Facebook