California Court of Appeal confirms that shorter 90-day statute of limitations applies in Political Reform Act claims affecting land use actions

Allen Matkins – December 20

California’s Second District Court of Appeal recently affirmed that a shorter 90-day statute of limitations, and not a longer three- or four- year statute of limitations, applies to Political Reform Act (PRA) claims that challenge land use decisions. (AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. City of Los Angeles, B311144, December 14, 2022.) This ruling matters because it drastically limits the window in which PRA suits might impact discretionary real estate actions.

News

San Diego could approve far more high-rise housing, ADUs under new proposal

The San Diego Union-Tribune – January 2

A new San Diego proposal aims to jump-start production of high-rise housing and backyard apartments by loosening rules that govern where such homes can be built. Rules that allow taller apartment buildings and more backyard units when a property is near mass transit would be softened to require the transit line be within 1 mile — rather than the current standard of half a mile. The proposal also has incentives that encourage developers to build more lower-priced rental housing in prosperous neighborhoods where there are high-paying jobs and educational opportunities. The proposal is scheduled to be discussed by the City Council’s Land Use and Housing Committee in January, and then by the full council in February.

Settlement between City of San Jose and Santa Clara County allows for more housing in North San Jose

NBC Bay Area – December 21

Santa Clara County and city of San Jose officials have finalized a monumental housing agreement that could bring in thousands of housing units to North San Jose. Signed off unanimously by the San Jose City Council, the two jurisdictions resolved a decade-long legal disagreement that prevented San Jose from building housing developments in its northern region.

Landlord group files legal challenge to L.A.’s transfer tax

The Real Deal – December 22

Landlord advocacy group Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles has joined with a nonprofit tax policy lobbying group to file the first legal challenge to Measure ULA, the controversial new City of Los Angeles transfer tax measure. The legal challenge hinges on the new tax’s stated allocation: While some transfer taxes have been permitted in California charter cities, the complaint says, “transfer taxes that are ‘special taxes,’ however, are prohibited for all local governments.” It goes on to argue that Measure ULA is actually a special tax because the revenue it would generate is “specifically dedicated to housing and homeless services.”

Santa Ana’s rent control law will require landlords to register rentals in new database

The Orange County Register – December 21

More changes affecting Santa Ana tenants and landlords are in the works for 2023. Santa Ana — Orange County’s first city to adopt rent control and eviction protections — plans to create a Rental Housing Board and a registry of rentals in the city. By next July, city officials plan to create a new seven-member board that will oversee the enforcement of the city’s rent control law and offer both tenants and landlords a place to resolve some disputes outside of court. Meanwhile, a new rental registry will serve as a database of the city’s rentals and track rent increases.

State dials up pressure on Coronado to zone for more affordable housing

KPBS – December 21

State housing officials are increasing pressure on Coronado to adopt a plan that meaningfully addresses the city's need for affordable housing and racial desegregation. California's Department of Housing and Community Development, or HCD, sent Coronado a letter last week stating that after more than 18 months the city is still out of compliance with the state's Housing Element law.

The January 31, 2023, deadline for Housing Element compliance is rapidly approaching. As explained in our prior alert, the so-called “Builder’s Remedy” under the Housing Accountability Act applies when a local jurisdiction has not adopted a revised Housing Element in compliance with state law, in which case the local jurisdiction cannot deny a qualifying housing development project even if it is inconsistent with the general plan and zoning ordinance (subject to limited exceptions).

[View source.]