Attorney General Bonta and Governor Newsom Announce ‘Major Win’ in State’s Housing Lawsuit Against Huntington Beach

This article has been updated to include comments from Huntington Beach Councilman, Chef Andrew Gruel.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) announced on social media and in a press release that Huntington Beach has been ordered by the San Diego Superior Court “requiring the City of Huntington Beach to, among other things, adopt a housing element within 120 days and restricting the City’s land use authority, effective immediately, until it does so. The City was required to submit a compliant housing element on October 15, 2021, more than four years ago. Today’s decision effectively puts an end to the City’s policy of blocking affordable housing for its residents,” the press release states.

On X and in a press release, Bonta ironically proclaimed that ‘Huntington Beach is not above the law.”,

“Huntington Beach is not above the law. Its leaders must comply with all our laws, including our state’s housing laws. We remain fully committed to ensuring that Huntington Beach does its part to address our state’s housing crisis. It has been squandering public money for far too long trying to shirk that responsibility,” Bonta stated.

After extensive proceedings in the courts, 

@CAgovernor @California_HCD and I have secured the relief that we sought all along. 

Huntington Beach has now been ordered to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days. 

Huntington Beach is not above the law. 

Its leaders must comply with all our laws, including our state’s housing laws.

After extensive proceedings in the courts, @CAgovernor, @California_HCD, and I have secured the relief that we sought all along.

Huntington Beach has now been ordered to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days.

Huntington Beach is not above the law.

Its leaders…

— Rob Bonta (@AGRobBonta) December 20, 2025

In response to the State’s lawsuit, the City of Huntington Beach filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the certain California housing laws. The City’s lawsuit was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s dismissal, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit then denied the City’s petition for rehearing en banc. The City has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the aforementioned rulings, and that request remains ongoing.

In response to Bonta’s announcement, Huntington Beach City Councilman, Chef Andrew Gruel noted that building over 13,000 affordable housing units in Huntington Beach is “absurd,’ confirming that there is pending litigation.

I’ll continue to contend that the notion of Huntington Beach being forced to build over 13k units is absurd. But also, the housing element the State is mandating the City adopt is inconsistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and that issue is pending before the… https://t.co/yR2u4pZcde

— Chef Andrew Gruel (@ChefGruel) December 20, 2025

But what about the liberal enclave of Marin County? They remain exempted (or above the law) due to Democrats’ chicanery.

In 2023, The Globe reported on Marin County’s exemption:

Huntington Beach is a charter city which has more local controls, exempting it from some state zoning laws, according to a panel of the California 4th District Court of Appeal. The appeals court ruled in 2017 that charter cities like Huntington Beach can approve plans that don’t meet the state’s housing requirements and can eliminate sites zoned for affordable housing. The state appealed the ruling.

The Department of Housing and Community Development reported in 2019 that most of California city’s housing plans are in compliance, while 51 cities and counties were not, including Huntington Beach… and Selma, Orange Cove, Holtville, Lake County, Bradbury, Claremont, La Puente, Maywood, Montebello, Paramount, Rolling Hills, South El Monte, Westlake Village, Atwater… while all Marin County cities were listed in compliance.

That report is no longer available on the housing department website.

In addition to requiring the City to adopt a housing element within 120 days, the San Diego Superior Court ordered the following:

• The June 20, 2024 order finding that the City is out of compliance with the Housing Element Law remains effective for purposes of the penalty provisions of Gov. Code section 65585(l), which provides for escalating penalties after one year of non-compliance with a court order, culminating potentially in the appointment of a receiver.
• The City must fast track the review and approval of Builder’s Remedy projects.
• The City must fast track the review and approval of projects that would have been entitled to by-right treatment if the City had adopted its draft housing element in 2023.
• The City cannot use existing land use policies to deny projects that would have been entitled to by-right treatment in its draft housing element.
• The City’s permitting, rezoning, and subdivision authority is otherwise suspended for sites identified in its draft housing element.

“Huntington Beach needs to end this pathetic NIMBY behavior,” said Governor Gavin Newsom. “They are failing their own citizens by wasting time and money that could be used to create much-needed housing. No more excuses, you lost once again — it’s time to get building.”

“This decision once again reaffirms that no one is above the law, and Huntington Beach can no longer refuse to do its part to address California’s crisis of housing affordability and homelessness,” said HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez. “Charter cities are not exempt from state housing law, and the few bad actors who believe so need to stop looking for a way to avoid their responsibilities.”

Chief Editor of the Globe Katy Grimes wrote in 2023:

Neither Marin County nor Huntington Beach should not be forced to comply with the state’s one-size-fits-all housing mandates – even granny flats behind the main house. Cities and counties are much better suited to determine housing needs – and if they even want more housing built in their region. Water requirements, roads and bridges, are impacted, as are public schools, hospitals and medical facilities, and even grocery stores.

Even “affordable” housing is very expensive in California, and that is because of state and local zoning and permitting, making it progressively harder to construct new housing. The median home price in California is approximately $800,000, more than double the national average of about $350,000. To even build apartments in California, unit costs are also as high as $800,000.

Adding to construction and housing costs is a new tax signed by Governor Newsom earlier this year.

As we reported:

A new Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT) housing tax was quietly buried in the recent budget housing bill package in Assembly Bill 130, the bill Newsom signed in June claiming he was reforming the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Holy Grail of environmental policy.

The Coalition for Affordable, Reliable, and Equitable (CARE) Housing warns that the tax will drive up housing costs, destroy jobs, and worsen the state’s affordability crisis. The tax could reach $324,000 per home or apartment – “a crushing burden that translates into the equivalent of a $2.00 penalty for every extra mile driven over government-set driving limits,” the coalition said.

Joining the warning from the coalition, Senator Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) added:

“So much for Sacramento Democrats calling this the year of affordability as they snuck a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) mandate into a budget bill, creating new hurdles for housing development by forcing developers to pay costly fees if projects are deemed to increase drive time. Ultimately, this provision will hike up construction costs and make housing even more expensive.”

“At a time when Sacramento Democrats declare that California faces a severe housing shortage, this provision is counterproductive and will only worsen our housing and affordability crises.”

“Housing is not a one-size-fits-all, and yet this is another attack on the way of life for families who choose to live in rural communities or away from high-density housing.”