Housing advocates sue Newsom, local leaders over duplex ban in fire recovery zones

The fight over how much new housing should be allowed in neighborhoods rebuilding from the Palisades and Eaton fires is headed to court.

Advocates for increased housing construction filed a lawsuit Wednesday against Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles-area politicians over their orders banning duplexes in burn zones.

The group YIMBY Law alleges Newsom, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and others acted illegally when they issued orders to suspend the state law SB 9 in certain neighborhoods now rebuilding from the Palisades and Eaton fires.

SB 9 allows single-family homeowners to split their lots and build duplexes, in some cases creating four units where one house previously stood.

In July, Newsom signed an order granting local governments the ability to block the law in high fire risk zones. Bass quickly took up the offer, banning SB 9 projects in the Pacific Palisades.

Other local governments, including the city of Pasadena, Malibu and L.A. County followed suit.

The lawsuit seeks an injunction ordering local governments to begin processing SB 9 applications again, as well as a declaration that Newsom’s order was illegal.

YIMBYs say bans raise barriers to rebuilding 

YIMBY Law Executive Director Sonja Trauss said the bans will make rebuilding harder for some families. She said some may only be able to return by selling pieces of their land, pooling finances with family members to live multi-generationally, or earning extra income from new rental units.

“Making it harder for families to use the single most impactful tool they have left — their land — doesn’t make recovery safer,” Trauss said in a statement. “It raises the barrier of who gets to come back at all.”

Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in an email to LAist that the Governor's Office was holding firm on the order.

“We will not allow outside groups — even longstanding allies — to attack the Palisades, and communities in the highest fire risk areas throughout L.A. County, or undermine local flexibility to rebuild after the horror of these fires,” Gallegos said.

Newsom’s office had been in discussions with YIMBY Law earlier this week on possible changes to the order to stave off a lawsuit. But Gallegos said Newsom would not “negotiate away” protections for burn zones.

“Our obligation is to survivors, full stop,” Gallegos said. “If defending them requires drawing firm lines, we will draw them."

The lawsuit alleges Newsom’s order violated the California Emergency Services Act, as well as the state Constitution’s separation of powers by overriding the legislature’s decision to apply SB 9 in high-fire-risk zones.

Because the governor’s order was illegal, the lawsuit claims, the local orders banning SB 9 projects in specific neighborhoods were also unlawful.

The complaint says the moves to ban duplexes and lot splits were spurred by “the lobbying influence of a small, highly-connected, wealthy community, and their ability to stop a type of housing they dislike, even in the midst of a generational housing crisis.”

What led to the bans

Some Pacific Palisades residents erupted with anger over news in the summer that seven SB 9 project applications had been filed with the city of L.A. They contended that increased housing density would harm the neighborhood’s character, and would clog evacuations in future emergencies.

L.A. City Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Palisades, blamed the situation on “opportunistic developers” whom she said were using SB 9 to “exploit a devastating disaster for their economic advantage.”

But as the complaint from YIMBY Law notes, SB 9 contains owner-occupancy requirements that bar outside developers from building the densest projects allowed under the law. Applicants must state that they intend to live on the site for at least three years before they can split a lot.

Bass’s office did not comment on the lawsuit, but provided a statement that said she “will continue to work with Governor Newsom and state leaders to advocate for the Palisades community as rebuilding continues."

Officials with the city of Pasadena, which enacted a ban on SB 9 projects in high fire risk zones in September, declined to comment on pending litigation. Officials in the city of Malibu, which was also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, did not respond to requests for comment.

How did L.A. County end up banning SB 9?

Soon after Newsom’s order, L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger — who represents Altadena — told LAist she did not intend to ban SB 9 projects in unincorporated parts of the county. At the time, she said, “I don't want to disenfranchise anyone from the ability to rebuild.”

However, a memo on the county’s Planning Department website now says SB 9 projects located in the zones outlined in Newsom’s order are “not eligible” for faster approval under the state law. County officials confirmed that Planning Director Amy Bodek made the decision. They said the ban did not require a vote from the Board of Supervisors.

Most of Altadena is not categorized as a “very high” fire hazard severity zone. But about 23% of Altadena’s single-family lots are in high fire risk zones. County planning officials told LAist they have stopped processing SB 9 applications in those areas.

In a statement, Barger said. “The County is applying lawful SB 9 restrictions in Very High Fire Hazard Areas to prioritize public safety in areas where critical infrastructure is constrained or limited — which I support. But I also believe SB 9 empowers Eaton Fire survivors to rebuild homes that meet multigenerational needs and add lasting value to their communities.”