Wealthy enclave’s habitat gambit fails
State attorney general: ‘No valid basis to claim ... Woodside is a habitat for mountain lions’
Woodside reversed its ban on small developments under a new state housing policy, yielding to public pressure and a warning from state Attorney General Rob Bonta that having mountain lions wasn’t a valid excuse to break state law.
Town leaders had argued the entire municipality was a habitat for the vulnerable mountain lion and therefore exempt any projects under Senate Bill 9. The town began accepting development applications under SB 9 on Monday, after drawing scorn and scrutiny from state leaders and housing advocates who called Woodside’s initial decision ridiculous and shameless.
But Bonta, who established a housing strike force in November to police development policies in cities and towns, said Woodside’s claim was “contrary to law.”
“There is no valid basis to claim that the entirety of Woodside is a habitat for mountain lions, a candidate for protection under the California Endangered Species Act,” Bonta’s deputy wrote in a letter sent Sunday, noting that his office would “not sit idly by.”
SB 9, which took effect Jan. 1, makes it easier for property owners to split their lots and build up to four new homes or apartments units in single-family neighborhoods. Municipalities have been drafting local rules to implement the state edict. Some, like Woodside, have balked at efforts to make development easier.
A Woodside planner wrote in a memo Jan. 27 that “given that Woodside — in its entirety — is habitat for a candidate species, no parcel within Woodside is currently eligible for an SB 9 project.”
But in a statement released Sunday, the town said it had received further guidance from the Department of Fish and Wildlife
on how to identify mountain lion habitat and how it could implement the law. Fish and wildlife officials “advised that the entire Town of Woodside cannot be considered habitat. As such, the Town Council has directed staff to immediately begin accepting SB 9 applications,” the statement said.
Bonta drove the point home.
“Land that is already developed with, for example a single-family home is not, by definition, habitat,” deputy attorney general Matthew Struhar wrote for Bonta. “That mountain lions appear in Woodside from time to time does not make any of its individual parcels mountain lion habitat. Rather, it demonstrates the range of the mountain lion where the species may be found in its lifetime.”
Big cat populations have become vulnerable, as development has encroached into their habitat and put up barriers for the animals to hunt and meet suitable mates, biologists say. Wildlife experts say smart development can allow mountain lions to coexist with humans and rebuild healthy big cat communities.
Woodside has a population of about 5,300 and boasts a collection of century-old estates, modern family compounds and a median home value of $4.5 million.
The town has met modest state development goals in recent years, building 65 homes and apartments, including 31 homes for very low income residents and 25 homes for high earners, according to a December 2021 regional progress report.
New state guidelines will require it to build 328 homes and apartments in coming years, including about 40% for low income residents.
In recent months, state officials have announced task forces to enforce housing laws in towns and cities. The Department of Housing and Community Development in October established an 25-member team to ensure compliance with state law.
A month later, Bonta’s office established a housing strike force in November with about a dozen members focused on enforcing often-ignored planning and development regulations.
The state in 2019 sued Huntington Beach in Southern California, claiming the oceanside community has refused to adequately plan for and build low-income housing.
But the emphasis on addressing the state’s housing crisis with new laws and enforcement has drawn backlash. The League of California Cities has criticized Bonta and other state officials for intruding into local land use decisions.
A handful of local elected leaders have embraced a ballot petition that would allow cities to reject most state housing laws. Critics say the proposition would be far-reaching, and could allow cities to ignore much of state law.