Marinwood, CA — A local community group has withdrawn its complaint against developers of an affordable housing project at Marinwood Plaza, shifting the focus of their legal challenge solely toward Marin County. The Marinwood Coalition Against Segregation initially included both the county and the developers, Marinwood Propco Limited Partnership and Lee Hoyt, in their lawsuit. The decision to dismiss the developers as defendants underscores the complexities and uncertainties surrounding litigation under new state housing laws.
The project planned for Marinwood Plaza intends to construct 125 affordable apartments across four three-story buildings, a development that received its green light from the Marin County Community Development Agency in December. The controversy began when the coalition filed a lawsuit in January, challenging the county’s approval of the project, which is slated to be entirely affordable.
Plaintiffs argue that county development codes restrict the proportion of entirely affordable housing projects, leading to the accusation that the county circumvented these limitations by approving the project. Additionally, the lawsuit claims that both the developers and the county had threatened legal ramifications against individual coalition members, potentially imposing substantial personal financial burdens on them.
These potential ramifications come on the heels of Assembly Bill 439, signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2023. The law enables defendants in housing lawsuits to seek recovery of attorney’s fees and costs if the suit is deemed to be obstructive and against housing projects intended entirely for low-income households. This legal provision was explicitly cited as a deterrent by James Nielsen, the plaintiffs’ attorney, highlighting the increased risks for those contesting housing developments on similar grounds.
Riley Hurd, representing the developers, indicated that the dropping of the lawsuit against his clients reflects the broader influence and deterrent power of California’s new housing laws. He suggested that the litigation faced significant obstacles in proving its merit, and the legal framework now places a heavier burden on those who challenge affordable housing without substantial grounds.
Before a judge can order plaintiffs to cover the defendants’ legal costs, they must ascertain the lawsuit’s likelihood of failing or being primarily intended to delay the project. This prerequisite adds an additional layer of judicial scrutiny in such disputes.
The Marinwood project’s adherence to county guidelines regarding affordable housing is part of the broader issue. Marin County designates housing as affordable if it’s aimed at households earning at or below 80% of the area median income. This policy aligns with state regulations to promote mixed-income housing that avoids segregation by including both market-rate and affordable units within the same developments.
The amended lawsuit continues to seek judicial clarification on several legal interpretations, including whether the county has overstepped its authority by approving projects that diverge from traditional income diversity requirements specified in county codes, which mandate that no more than 20% of units in new developments are dedicated to affordable housing. Marin County Counsel Brian Washington has countered, asserting that the code specifies only the minimum percentage of affordable units required, not the maximum.
As litigation continues, the outcome will likely influence future affordable housing projects in Marin County and potentially set precedents for how similar cases are handled under California’s evolving legal landscape.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically written by Open AI. The information contained herein including the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. For corrections, retractions, or to request article removal, please contact [email protected].