City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. State: SB 9 Withstands Challenge from General Law Cities
Summary
In City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. State, the California Court of Appeals affirmed the constitutionality of Senate Bill No. 9 (SB 9), a state law requiring ministerial approval of certain housing developments in single-family zones. A group of general law cities challenged the law, arguing it illegally usurped their local control over land use. The court rejected this challenge, holding that the “municipal affairs doctrine,” which protects local autonomy, applies only to charter cities. Because the appellants were general law cities, they were subject to conflicting state laws on matters of statewide concern like housing.
Background
In 2021, the California Legislature enacted SB 9 to address the state’s housing crisis. The law requires cities to ministerially approve—that is, without discretionary review or public hearings—both the development of two-unit housing projects and the subdivision of urban lots within single-family residential zones. This effectively allows property owners to build up to four housing units on a parcel previously zoned for one.
Four general law cities—Rancho Palos Verdes, Lakewood, Paramount, and Simi Valley—sued the State of California, claiming SB 9 was unconstitutional. They argued the law improperly stripped them of their authority to regulate local land use, imposing a “one-size-fits-all” approach that ignored local conditions like fire risk and infrastructure capacity.
They further alleged that SB 9 was not reasonably related to its stated goal of promoting affordable housing, as the law includes no affordability requirements for the new units created. The trial court ruled in favor of the state, and the cities appealed.
Key Court Findings
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment, focusing on the fundamental legal distinction between general law cities and charter cities.
The court’s analysis began and ended with the cities’ status as general law cities. Under the California Constitution, the powers of general law cities are derived from state law, and their local ordinances are void if they conflict with state “general laws.” The court noted that while land use regulation is traditionally a local function, it is not immune from state preemption.
The cities attempted to argue that SB 9 illegally interfered with their “municipal affairs.” However, the court explained that the municipal affairs doctrine—also known as “home rule”—is a constitutional protection available exclusively to charter cities.
This doctrine allows charter cities to maintain control over local matters, even in the face of conflicting state law, unless the issue is one of true statewide concern. Because the appellants conceded they were general law cities, they could not invoke this doctrine. Having failed to identify any other constitutional provision that SB 9 violated, their legal challenge collapsed.
Key Takeaways
- City Status Is Critical: A city’s legal authority to resist state land use laws depends entirely on whether it is a general law city or a charter city.
- General Law Cities Are Subordinate to State Law: When a state law addressing a matter of statewide concern (like housing) conflicts with a local ordinance from a general law city, the state law prevails.
- The “Municipal Affairs Doctrine” Does Not Protect General Law Cities: The primary legal argument for local control over zoning and land use—the municipal affairs doctrine—is not available to general law cities.
- SB 9 Remains Enforceable in General Law Cities: This ruling confirms the state’s power to enforce housing laws like SB 9 and limits the ability of general law cities to challenge them based on claims of usurped local authority.
This decision solidifies the State of California’s broad authority to legislate on housing matters and makes clear that general law cities possess limited power to defy state mandates in this area. It affirms that, absent a specific constitutional violation, the Legislature has the power to dictate land use policies to address issues it deems of statewide importance.
