"Anyone who thought the final nail had been hammered in the dispute between cities and the state over builder's remedy might want to think again. Let's revisit the latest in the saga involving Huntington Beach, starting with the observation that there was some presumptive PR at play when Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a joint declaration of victory on Thursday. The win they claimed came when the California Supreme Court declined to review a lower-court decision."
"Huntington Beach headed to U.S. District Court to challenge the housing mandates based on their constitutionality. Charter cities such as Huntington Beach, Los Angeles and San Francisco are called that for a reason. They have charters that function as municipal constitutions of sorts. In some cases, a charter can shield a city from state regulation. Election laws and prevailing wage are areas where courts have found the city charter and ordinances to have the final say on a local matter."
California courts recently declined to grant review of a lower-court ruling that rejected special charter-city status as a loophole against builder's remedy enforcement. Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta framed the denial as a victory for state housing law. Huntington Beach nonetheless pursued a separate federal lawsuit alleging that state housing mandates are unconstitutional and that charter-city authority can limit state regulation. Charter cities possess charters that can function like municipal constitutions, and courts have sometimes allowed charters to govern local matters such as elections and prevailing wage. The city petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court and says it will continue to defend its charter authority and environmental stewardship while seeking fair enforcement.
Read at therealdeal.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]