|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Vaishnavi Srinivasan
The city of Pleasanton has faced many housing-related lawsuits over the past two decades. While these lawsuits have changed to target specific city policies, they continue to target housing policies. Recently, in the past month, rezoning policies have been approved to be proposed to the council.
One of Pleasanton’s biggest housing lawsuits began in 2006, when Urban Habitat, a public advocacy group, sued the city over policies regarding housing for low income families and the city’s 29,000-home housing cap. In 2010, the case was settled, and the city of Pleasanton was required to rezone areas for more affordable housing and pass an ordinance against discrimination. Additionally, as a result of the lawsuit and another with the California Attorney General at the time, Edmund Brown, the housing cap was lifted in 2010.
In 2023, another advocacy group, the Housing Action Coalition (HAC), sent a letter to the city of Pleasanton stating that its 2023-2031 Housing Element did not abide by California state law. The Housing Element, a mandatory housing plan that outlines how California cities and counties will accommodate new housing for various income levels, was certified by the state.
The group argued that the city failed to get permission from property owners before including them, which city staff said was not required. HAC also said that, because some of the properties weren’t vacant, it was less likely to be developed within the prescribed timeframe.
The City Council agreed to settle with HAC by adding additional sites to the Housing Element inventory and during its Sept. 9 meeting, the Pleasanton Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend to the council the rezoning of three additional sites.
But not before commissioners asked questions and expressed frustration that the significant amount of work and community input put into the 2023-2031 Housing Element was upended by an outside group.
“So once again we have somebody from outside the city, who doesn’t understand the city, what the city’s values are, what the priorities are, who has come in and demanded we make a bunch more changes to our city,” Commission Chair Brandon Pace said, citing reactions from community members that including these properties will impact their neighborhoods.
“How do we do our best to protect ourselves from these outside groups that are trying to ram these changes down our throat?” Pace asked.
City staff acknowledged the frustration and told the commissioners that Pleasanton isn’t alone in having their Housing Elements questioned by outside housing advocacy groups.
Housing is a hot-button issue in Pleasanton, with some concerned about maintaining Pleasanton’s small town character, worsening traffic and more strain on city services.
However, others believe the expansion of the number of housing units allows more people to experience what the city of Pleasanton has to offer. Allowing for a larger and more economically diverse population can help exemplify what Pleasanton is really about – community.
This article was written as part of the The Junior Journalist Program allows high-school students an opportunity to report on topics important to them and communicate with their peers while receiving training in journalism and learning to think critically about information. To support the program and this publication’s participation in it, make a donation.
Director Sanwong faces challenge from committee chair Henry for East Bay Parks Ward 5September 13, 2026 8:41 pm
