Grover Beach and its citizen-led measure to lower building heights—anticipated to break several California housing laws if it passes—caught the eye of state agencies.
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) weighed in on the ballot measure through a “letter of technical assistance,” submitted roughly two hours before the July 27 Grover Beach City Council meeting.
“Should Measure F-26 pass without the required compensatory zoning action to accommodate potential reduction in residential capacity in violation of the HCA [Housing Crisis Act], the action shall be deemed void,” the letter read. “If HCD finds that a city’s actions do not comply with state law, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the local government is in violation of state law.”
Measure F-26 proposes to limit building heights in Grover Beach to 40 feet in commercially zoned districts and to 33 feet in industrial zones, while developers must set aside 33 percent of mixed-use buildings for commercial use.
A community group called Save Grover Beach is behind the ballot measure effort and came together after growing dissatisfaction with a number of towering new developments approved at the western end of downtown.
City officials were concerned that if voters passed the measure in November, it could lead to Grover Beach falling out of compliance with the state’s Housing Crisis Act, Housing Accountability Act, Density Bonus Law, and Housing Element Law.
‘If HCD finds that a city’s actions do not comply with state law, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the local government is in violation of state law’
—California Department of Housing and Community Development
Proponents, convinced that the city didn’t want to honor the will of the public, ultimately declined to meet with a City Council-appointed ad hoc committee formed to discuss how Grover Beach could follow the housing laws while still letting the ballot measure play out in November.
According to the HCD’s letter, to comply with state law, the city must update its Housing Element to simultaneously upzone alternative parcels to offset the possible reduction in housing capacity if the measure is successful. That ensures no net loss in residential development potential.
The HCD added that information about the upzoning process should have been included in the initiative’s language so residents could vote on both items.
HCD’s warnings to Grover Beach—ineligibility and delays in receiving certain state funds, $10,000-per-month penalties for action brought by the attorney general, loss of local land-use authority, and application of builder’s remedy—come at a time when other California cities are facing litigation for noncompliance with state housing laws.
On July 16, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that California sued Calexico, Costa Mesa, Half Moon Bay, Ridgecrest, and Turlock for refusing to comply with state housing laws.
There isn’t enough time to update Grover Beach’s Housing Element before the November election since the process would take at least a year.
“An update of this scale requires a comprehensive analysis of the measure’s impacts on residential land capacity and zoning, preparation of technical studies, environmental review as required, and extensive public outreach,” City Manager Matthew Bronson told New Times.
Amending the Housing Element would also include public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council and multiple rounds of review and certification by the HCD. The California Coastal Commission must also approve consequent amendments to the local coastal program and the development code.
Bronson confirmed that the city was aware of the potential need to change the Housing Element concurrently, adding that it was discussed publicly during City Council and Planning Commission meetings before the HCD letter arrived.
“City staff also met with HCD in June at HCD’s request and pursuant to council direction requested a letter outlining the actions needed by the city for updating the Housing Element if Measure F-26 passed,” he said. “The ad hoc committee was intending to discuss the topic of updating the Housing Element concurrently with the measure proponents had they agreed to meet with the committee.”
Measure proponent Donna De La Rosa told New Times that she doesn’t regret turning down the private meeting with the ad hoc committee. She said that the city didn’t respond to her request of holding a town hall meeting about the measure, though City Council wants one along with community workshops as part of the next Housing Element update.
Measure supporter Kelvin Coveduck suggested that City Council could request that staff evaluate returning to 2022’s building height code standards, which don’t include percentage requirements divvying up commercial and housing in mixed-use developments.
“Unfortunately, a refined version of F-26 in two years [2028 election] will be too far in the future,” he said. “The tall building projects will make Grover Beach unrecognizable in this short time span. If the Grover Beach City Council fails to take action soon, then the only alternative is to elect new representatives in November.”
This article appears in July 30- August 6, 2026.
It looks like this settles the controversy of if Measure F-26 would be legal.
Councilperson Tuggles and City Manager Bronson had warned that the Measure violated HCD laws.
Sounds like the proponents of Measure F-26 may want to withdraw it before August 7th.
I agree with Scott. Looking through the periscope, this thing appears to be dead in the water. Do the right thing, pull it and work through the housing element process.
That’s alright. Let the State know that their coastal building policies are not what the people want. HCD has always been a political institution controlled by selfish interests.
While I agree in concept, this state overreach is due to cities being pushed by NIMBY resident groups for so long that our housing inventory is out of balance with demand.
Coveduck should have withdrawn the ill-fated F-2 immediately when the HCD made its statement and agreed to join the ad hoc committee. If this is how Kelvin Coveduck operates, Grover Beach citizens should not vote for him for city council.
So if the ballot passes, and if its takes one to two years for the City to update their housing element and implementation documents, then the City will be in non-compliance with State housing law. If that happens, developers can seek builders remedy, which means zoning standards don’t apply, and can effectively get approval for really tall buildings. Seems counter intuitive. Hopefully the ballot proponents drop this and avoid wasting tax payer money.
Actually, demand is out of balance with supply.