The Brief

When a judge ruled recently that a controversial state housing law did not apply to a handful of southern California cities, Julie Testa saw it as an invitation.

The late April opinion from Los Angeles County Judge Curtis Kin held that a 2021 state law letting homeowners split up their houses into as many as four separate units regardless of local zoning restrictions had no effect in Redondo Beach, Carson, Torrance, Whittier or Del Mar. The reason: The five SoCal jurisdictions are “charter cities” — jurisdictions with their own municipal constitutions that grant them extra independence from state law.

Testa, the vice mayor of Pleasanton, wanted what Redondo Beach was having. She wanted to turn her bedroom community east of San Francisco Bay into a charter city.

“The state Legislature has declared war on our cities,” said Testa. “We think that this is a turning of that tide.”

Since first winning local office in 2020, Testa has spent much of her short political career chafing against the spate of new state housing laws that force local governments to automatically approve apartment buildings, duplexes and backyard cottages. She cobbled together a loose group of like-minded politicians under the banner of the California Alliance of Local Electeds. A few days after Kin’s ruling, the group’s weekly Zoom meeting saw near record turnout, she said.

Now Pleasanton is one of at least three California cities, all San Francisco Bay Area suburbs, that have taken the first step toward adopting a charter since the April ruling. Testa and three of her four city council colleagues instructed city staff to look into making the transition in mid-May. City councils in nearby Brentwood and the hyper-affluent Silicon Valley suburb of Atherton followed suit this month.

Becoming a charter city — as roughly 120 of California’s 482 cities have done over the course of the state’s history — requires local voter approval. Before that, city officials have to actually write a charter, a comprehensive, technical governing document that covers everything from local election procedure to the dos and don’ts of municipal debt management. The three cities are probably kicking off that lengthy process too late for this November’s election, meaning that voters in the three cities won’t weigh in until at least 2026 — if at all.

“We will see a lot of irreversible consequences in that period of time, so I am disappointed, but I do believe that we must do what we can do to defend our constitutional right to local control,” said Testa.

Jovita Mendoza, the Brentwood council member who is pushing the charter effort in her city, said housing policy isn’t her sole motivation. Charter cities have more flexibility over contracting and purchasing policies, election procedures and taxation. But the recent ruling out of Los Angeles “definitely helped” provide fresh inspiration.

Brentwood’s council voted unanimously to begin the process last Tuesday. At a late evening hearing on the subject, Planning Commissioner Rod Flohr endorsed the idea.

“Most of the public is still kind of unaware of how restricted we’ve become, almost to the point where it feels sometimes like the planning commission and city council can’t really do anything anymore,” he said. “This may be our only avenue to…keep working to make Brentwood the jewel of east county.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration has ordered local governments to plan for an additional 2.5 million new homes through the end of the decade in an effort to bring down prices and rents. That’s part of a broader political shift in Sacramento as the governor, the attorney general and the Legislature have more aggressively promoted more housing, even over the objections of local elected officials and residents.

Mendoza in Brentwood was one of the chief proponents of a proposed statewide ballot initiative that would have allowed local governments to override state land use laws. The measure failed to gather enough signatures for this year’s election.

The April ruling opened up a new potential strategy. “If the charter cities win on appeal, I think you’re going to see it happening more and more,” she said.

On housing, the tie often goes to the state

Many legal experts are skeptical that the ruling will hold — and if it does, whether that would be the death blow to state land use authority that many local control advocates hope it will be.

“If I were looking to become a charter city in order to avoid (the state’s duplex law), I would not waste my time,” said UC Davis law professor Darien Shanske. “This decision will be overturned.”

Since the 1880s, California cities have come in two distinct flavors: “General law” cities, which have to govern themselves under rules set forth by the state Legislature, and charter cities, which the state constitution grants autonomy when it comes to “municipal affairs.”

Unhelpfully, the constitution doesn’t actually specify what those “municipal affairs” are. That makes the precise scope of a charter city’s political autonomy from the state an uncertain and moving target that courts have had to address on a case-by-case basis.

New homes under construction in Pleasanton on June 16, 2024. The city of Pleasanton has voted to explore the possibility of becoming a charter city.

(

Loren Elliott

/

CalMatters

)

As state lawmakers have unleashed a raft of pro-construction bills over the last decade, the courts have typically allowed them to apply to charter and general law cities alike.

“The courts generally have not been very receptive to charter city arguments given the housing crisis,” said Barbara Kautz, a land use attorney who regularly represents cities and counties.

Kautz’s law firm, Goldfarb & Lipman, has represented Pleasanton, Brentwood and Atherton, but is not doing so in their current quests to become charter cities.

The April ruling is a notable exception to the trend. But it’s also an exceedingly narrow one and not something on which to hang a legal revolution in land use policy, said Kautz. “As a long term strategy to avoid (state housing law), I just don’t know if it would have any effect,” she said.

What the ruling does — and doesn’t — say

California courts have generally let the Legislature steamroll local authorities, even in charter cities, if state lawmakers can prove that they are addressing a matter of “statewide concern” and that the bill they’re passing is narrowly tailored to address that concern.

The 2021 law itself specifies that the “statewide concern” in question is to ensure “access to affordable housing.”

Unfortunately for the state, “affordable housing” has multiple definitions. Affordable housing might refer to units that are legally required to be reserved for people making under a certain income with regulated rents or prices, sometimes called “deed-restricted affordable housing.” Or the term can simply refer to housing that’s cheap.

In his ruling, Kin concluded that the Legislature, in laying out its “statewide concern,” must have meant “affordable” in the first, deed-restricted sense. Because letting homeowners split their houses into duplexes “has, at best, an attenuated connection to affordable housing,” he wrote, the law wasn’t written narrowly enough to advance its stated goal and therefore doesn’t have the authority to trample over the rights of charter cities.

In short, the ruling dings the state duplex law because it didn’t justify its intent with the right term. UC Davis’ Shanske referred to the ruling jokingly as a “Simon didn’t say” legal test.

Kin has yet to submit a final judgment, which will clarify whether the ruling applies to just the five cities that sued or to every one of the more than 100 charter cities across California.

What the ruling doesn’t say is that charter cities are exempt from the duplex law because the state fundamentally lacks the authority to regulate how homes can be divided up. Nor does it say that charter cities are exempt from state housing requirements in general, which would have been at odds with a slew of recent court rulings.

Chris Elmendorf, one of Shanske’s colleagues at UC Davis School of Law who regularly opines on housing policy on social media, called Kin’s conclusion “a weird, narrow decision that turns on a lawyerly sleight of hand.”

A residential street in Pleasanton on June 16, 2024. The city of Pleasanton has voted to explore the possibility of becoming a charter city.

(

Loren Elliott

/

CalMatters

)

Even some of those who welcomed the ruling as a victory for local control were tempered in their enthusiasm, if only because the ruling seems to invite the Legislature to simply fix its wording with another bill. San Diego Democratic Sen. Toni Atkins, who authored the four-unit housing law, is working on a bill this year, Senate Bill 450, which aims to make it harder for local governments to obstruct the earlier duplex law by delaying approvals or imposing costly or unworkable size, design and setback requirements. An analysis last year by the UC Berkeley Terner Center found that the duplex law had resulted in precious little new housing, partially as a result of such restrictions.

Asked whether Atkins plans to respond to Kin’s ruling with a legislative fix, the senator’s spokesperson, Meredith McNamee, said in a statement that the senator believes “some legislative clean-up” would improve the implementation of the law she wrote.

The California Justice Department, which represented the state in the Redondo Beach case, has already filed a notice of appeal.

Long-term eviction defense funding for Los Angeles renters could soon begin to flow now that city officials have announced a break in an impasse dating back to May 2025.

L.A. City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto said Thursday she intends to sign a new $107 million contract with the Legal Aid Foundation of L.A. She said the contract — which was approved by the City Council and the mayor in April but still awaits her approval — was “nearly finalized.”

“I am fully committed to supporting these crucial eviction defense services for our vulnerable neighbors in need,” Feldstein Soto said in a statement.

Feldstein Soto — who will not secure a second term after placing third in last month’s primary election — pledged to continue investigating the legal aid group. She has frequently criticized the nonprofit for what she sees as a lack of transparency, though L.A. Housing Department officials say the group has consistently provided accounting and caseload data to the city.

“Taxpayers deserve transparency and accountability and to know that their money is being used as intended,” Feldstein Soto said.

Barbara Schultz, a Legal Aid Foundation attorney overseeing the city-funded Stay Housed L.A. program, said both parties have been negotiating final contract details for more than a week. She said the city attorney’s announcement was encouraging.

“[Feldstein Soto] said she was going to approve the contract, so I'm very excited to hear that,” Schultz said. “Moving forward… we can continue to grow, fully implement the ‘Right to Counsel,’ and tenants in Los Angeles will be much better off as a result.”

In response to Feldstein Soto’s claims that more than $58 million in eviction defense grants remain “unaccounted for” in the foundation’s financial audits and IRS forms, Schultz said taxpayer dollars have not been misspent and that no findings have been made to that effect.

“[The Legal Aid Foundation] is a very large nonprofit law firm that has over 40 federal, state and local government contracts,” Schultz said. “We are very used to being audited. Any audit the city wants to do to satisfy itself is absolutely fine with us.”

Feldstein Soto denied a five-year contract to the legal aid group last year, arguing it should have gone through a competitive bidding process. After the city solicited applications and selected the group for new long-term funding, she later told city councilmembers in a confidential memo that they should consider withholding support for “a frequent litigant against the city.”

While she announced the contract should be ready for her signature by July 7, Feldstein Soto said her office would move forward with plans to assign forensic accountants to study how the legal aid group has spent more than $90 million in city funds since 2021.

At the Bristol Swap Mall in Santa Ana, people are flocking to buy their Mexico soccer team jerseys and paraphernalia.

“The color is green and that says Mexico right here,” said Catherine Hernandez, who’s entering third grade, as she pointed to the replica Mexico soccer jersey her mother had bought her at a nearby stall.

She asked her mother to get her one the day after Mexico’s win against Ecuador and is already thinking about how she’ll feel wearing it Sunday during Mexico’s knockout game against England in the Round of 16.

“Excited, very excited because I’m Mexican and I love this shirt,” she said.

Hernandez was born in the U.S. and her mother was born in Mexico. Both say their Mexico jerseys symbolize those similar but different prides in their Mexican backgrounds.

They're among fans rooting for Mexico’s men’s national soccer team to advance further than ever before into the World Cup tournament. A win against England would move the team to the Round of 8, the quarterfinals, for the third time. Along the way, this Mexico team has captured the imagination of many in the U.S. who have, or are close to, those of Mexican heritage.

Proudly wearing the green jersey

The market vendor at the stall said only one adult-size 2026 jersey remained. So many had been sold they'd had to place an order for more.

A replica of Mexico's 2026 FIFA World Cup soccer jersey.

(

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

/

LAist

)

Many Mexico fans have been wearing their jerseys on the days leading up to the team's World Cup matches.

“On Monday, I looked around to see a sea of green, white and red, and it nearly brought me to tears in line at Costco,” said Alex Alcantar, who lives in Norwalk.

He was born and raised in the U.S. and he says his Mexico soccer jersey symbolizes that experience.

“Why I wear my Mexico jersey is because I want to visibly represent this community when our contributions to society are so heavily discounted,” he said.

The team’s growing prominence has also coaxed some others in Mexican communities in the U.S. to feel more confident in their identity.

“I've never used [a Mexico jersey] before,” said Xochi Flores, who was born in Oxnard and whose great-grandparents were Mexican.

“I didn't feel like I could go around representing Mexico when I'm a Chicana, third generation, not the best Spanish speaker,” she said.

Xochi Flores (left), with her husband Cesar Castro, has become more comfortable wearing the soccer jersey recently.

(

Courtesy Xochi Flores

)

In the past year, she said she’s felt closer to her Mexican roots as she’s seen reports of farmworkers and other people of Mexican descent arrested by ICE agents.

So to her, wearing her Mexico soccer jersey means leaving behind insecurities she used to have about not being “Mexican enough,” as well as “not being American enough.”

“I want my kids to see me embracing all of the parts of me. … They don't have those insecurities, and that makes me happy,” Flores said.

Wearing the jersey when you're Mexican-ish

The stalls are attracting all types of customers. “I'm just looking for a Mexican soccer jersey,” said Son Lam, who lives in nearby Orange and identifies as Vietnamese.

Lam says he’s become devoted to soccer since the World Cup started June 11. Buying and wearing a Mexican soccer team jersey means showing off his newfound sports fandom already embraced by his extended family

“My wife is Mexican and to me, [wearing the Mexico jersey] means I can fit in with the family more," he said as he laughed.

However they identify, all these shoppers will likely be wearing their jerseys as they watch Mexico compete against England on Sunday, July 5. Joining millions of fans rooting for their team to advance to the next round, and keeping dreams of a 2026 FIFA World Cup championship alive.

Santa Ana voters could be asked in November to maintain the city’s 1.5% sales tax, which was set to decrease in 2029 and eventually expire.

Voters approved the citywide sales tax in 2018 on the condition that it sunset in 20 years. Now, the Santa Ana City Council will vote Tuesday on whether to ask voters in November to make the tax permanent.

The big picture

Only about one-third of cities in Orange County have a local sales tax on top of the county-imposed sales tax of 7.75%. Sales taxes in most of Los Angeles County are much higher — L.A.’s countywide sales tax is 9.75% and the highest total sales taxes for cities in L.A. County are in Lancaster and Palmdale, at 11.25% each, according to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.

Other potential tax hikes in OC

Voters in Orange will be considering a sales tax hike on their November ballot, after failing to get voters’ approval in 2024. San Clemente voters will also consider a local sales tax in November to pay for more sand to shore up local beaches.