Piedmont City Council Rejects Voters Rights
Why does the City Council want to take away voter control over Piedmont zoning? An elaborate effort is in progress to remove voters from deciding proposed zoning changes.
Do voters comprehend that the end of single-family zoning controlled by voters is currently being proposed by the City Council?
The City Council could have proposed to legitimately change the Charter language to take zoning control away from voters. However, this action was not included in the recent ballot measure proposing numerous Charter changes. The changes were approved by Piedmont voters.
The State requires 587 new housing sites in Piedmont. The State does not specify how or where these units will go. And despite Piedmont’s recognized hilly terrain, substandard streets, and built-out condition, Piedmont needs to find areas within the City where the housing can be built. Piedmont government does not have to build the units, but conditions and land must be available to all qualified entities (whether individual property owners or developer companies or non-profit corporations) to build the 587 housing units.
Piedmont is somewhat unique in that the City Charter does not bestow on the City Council the right to make the proposed zoning changes, unless approved by Piedmont voters. The State does not take voter rights away, for the State only requires complying with the regulations for building the 587 dwelling units.
The City Council, not the State, is the government entity proposing to take voters rights away by changing zoning without voter approval.
Piedmonts have for numerous decades retained the right by law under the City Charter to control the zoning changes as proposed by the City Council in the Housing Element. The City Council is not permitted to make the proposed zoning changes unless approved by the voters.
Many want Piedmont voters to adhere to the City Charter and control zoning changes in Piedmont. Others want the City Council to have complete control over changing single-family usage to multifamily high density use without voter approval.
The City Council members are sworn to uphold the laws governing the City of Piedmont. The City Council appears to assume Piedmont voters will not vote to do what is best for Piedmont, thus they plan to eliminate Piedmont voters rights. The City Council has shown a lack of confidence in Piedmont laws and Piedmont voters, thus opening the City up to litigation by those who want the City Charter as written to be upheld.
As Piedmont Election Voting Continues, the City Enters the Debate Among Candidates –
Using fliers, the City at great expense, continues to provide incorrect information on voters rights attempting to influence the current election on a primary election issue – voters rights regarding zoning.
The latest flier by the City of Piedmont’s poses questions and answers written in italics, PCA responses are in bold.
Does the City Charter require a vote of the electorate to enact the zoning changes proposed in the Draft Housing Element?
No. Piedmont’s City Charter explicitly states that the City Council is responsible for adopting and modifying the General Plan, which includes the Housing Element. The City Charter requires voter approval to change zoning district boundaries or move properties between zones. The Charter does not require a vote to modify uses and densities in an existing zone without changing boundaries.
This and other inappropriate City statements are attempts to justify prior and proposed illegal actions taken by the City of Piedmont based on ill advice from counsel regarding the City Charter and the City Code. The answer above does not conform with the wording in the City Charter and the City Code.
Every zone in Piedmont has been designated as allowing single-family use/classification. This includes the Public, Commercial, and Multifamily zones. Counsel’s advice has been to interpret Piedmont’s zoning incorrectly, allowing Single-family zoning uses to mean “all housing is housing” permitting multifamily high density housing wherever there is single-family zoning. This is a perversion of the City Charter and the City Code which require voter control over the uses and classifications within a zone.
Implementing Counsel’s advice eliminates single-family zoning in Piedmont and voter control as required under the City Charter.
The City Charter states:
“provided that any property which is zoned for uses other than or in addition to a single-family dwelling may be voluntarily rezoned by the owners thereof filing a written document executed by all of the owners thereof under penalty of perjury stating that the only use on such property shall be a single-family dwelling, and such rezoning shall not require a vote of the electors as set forth above.”
The City Charter state:
SECTION 9.02 ZONING SYSTEM
“The City of Piedmont is primarily a residential city, and the City Council shall have power to establish a zoning system within the City as may in its judgement be most beneficial. The Council may classify and reclassify the zones established, but no existing zones shall be reduced or enlarged with respect to size or area, and no zones shall be reclassified without submitting the question to a vote at a general or special election. No zone shall be reduced or enlarged and no zones reclassified unless a majority of the voters voting upon the same shall vote in favor thereof; provided that any property which is zoned for uses other than or in addition to a singlefamily dwelling may be voluntarily rezoned by the owners thereof filing a written document executed by all of the owners thereof under penalty of perjury stating that the only use on such property shall be a single-family dwelling, and such rezoning shall not require a vote of the electors as set forth above. “
From the City of Piedmont website, it states, “ Piedmont is divided into five districts or zones. Within each zone only certain uses of land and buildings are permitted and certain other uses of land and buildings are restricted or prohibited. Other uses may be “conditionally” permitted if they meet certain criteria.”
All Piedmont zones are zoned for single-family use.
ARTICLE 2. ZONING DISTRICTS: USES AND REGULATIONS 17.20
Zone A: Single family residential 17.22
Zone B: Public facilities 17.24
Zone C: Multi-family residential 17.26
Zone D: Commercial and mixed-use commercial/residential 17.28
Zone E: Single family residential estate
C. City Charter.
“The city’s zoning ordinance is also subject to the City Charter, particularly Section 9.01,
General Plan, Section 9.02, Zoning System, and Section 9.04, General Laws Applicable. Those sections read as follows: Section 9.01 General Plan. The City Council shall adopt, and may from time to time, modify a general plan setting forth policies to govern the development of the City. Such plan may cover the entire City and all of its functions and services or may consist of a Planning & Land Use 17-3 combination of plans governing specific functions and services or specific geographic areas which together cover the entire City and all of its functions and services. The plan shall also serve as a guide to Council action concerning such City planning matters as land use, development regulations and capital improvements.
Section 9.02 Zoning system.
The City of Piedmont is primarily a residential city, and the City Council shall have the power to establish a zoning system within the City as may in its judgment be most beneficial. The Council may classify and reclassify the zones established, but no existing zones shall be reduced or enlarged with respect to size or area, and no zones shall be reclassified without submitting the question to a vote at a general or special election. No zone shall be reduced or enlarged and no zones reclassified unless a majority of the voters voting upon the same shall vote in favor thereof; provided that any property which is zoned for uses other than or in addition to a single-family dwelling maybe voluntarily rezoned by the owners thereof filing a written document executed by all of the owners thereof under penalty of perjury stating that the only use on such property shall be a singlefamily dwelling, and such rezoning shall not require a vote of the electors as set forth above.
Section 9.04 General laws applicable. All general laws of the State applicable to municipal corporations, now or hereafter enacted, and which are not in conflict with the provisions of this Charter or with ordinances hereafter enacted, shall be applicable to the City. The City Council may adopt and enforce ordinances that, in relation to municipal affairs, shall control as against the general laws of the State. In this subsection C, Section 9.02, the prohibition not to reduce, enlarge, or reclassify a zone without a vote is understood to mean the city may not change the zone boundaries, or change (reclassify) a property from one zone to another. [ Language was produced by the City Planning Department, yet never voted upon by Piedmont electors. The City Code trumps any added language to the City Code.]
The City Charter does not state that a vote is required to amend regulations within a zone, such as allowed uses or density.
The City Council by accepting that voters have no control over “allowed uses or density,” denies the zoning code which specifies the uses within zone – public, commercial, single-family, and multifamily. What do the zone classifications mean if not how the area can be used within boundaries of the zone mean?
This analysis makes clear that a vote of the electorate is only required to alter the size and boundaries of existing zones, not to modifying uses within a zone.
This statement is incorrect. To add multifamily high density uses to single-family use without voter approval obviously enlarges the area for multifamily zoning use/classification and reduces the size of the existing zone.
Items regarding voter approval and illegal zoning changes can be found in City records including legal opinions and actions taken for the following:
CITY CODE:
“17.08.010 Establishment of zones. The zoning system of the City consists of two parts: (1) the City Charter, which contains the zoning policy and requirements for voter approval of zone classification changes; and (2) this chapter 17 of the City Code.
The City is divided into five zones as follows:
- Zone A Single family residential zone
- Zone B Public facilities zone
- Zone C Multi-family residential zone
- Zone D Commercial and mixed-use commercial/residential zone
- Zone E Single family residential estate zone
Within each zone, certain uses of land and buildings are allowed as permitted or conditional uses, and certain other uses of land and buildings are restricted or prohibited. If a use is not permitted or conditionally permitted, it is not allowed. Other regulations may apply.”
Corrections and comments concerning all of the incorrect statements made in the recently distributed City flier have not been made.
To read the entire City flier, click >charter-requirements-housing-element (1
I agree with the position that a vote to change zoning is required by the City Charter.
i agree vote is required to change zoning.
Thanks PCA. This is very helpful in trying to understand the City’s interpretation of the Charter. So community votes are required for the city to change the area of a zone (rezoning) and the use of that area (reclassifying). The City adopts the broadest definition of use to allow any form of housing on public land. If the definition of use is so broad, then why are there not just three simple zones – commercial, family, public – with City Council defining the use(s) within a zone over time. I think past Councils intended the specificity of a zone to mean something, especially when the Charter was adopted and revised, and have the community vote when that use was changed.
It should be noted that the City’s position allows City Council to make changes to Piedmont’s largest zones, single-family and estate, without a community vote. Presumably Council could change all of Piedmont to a multi-family zone. Within 2 years of adoption of the HE staff will make recommendations for revisions to the Charter and zones of Piedmont to facilitate more multi-family housing and the next Council could well invoke these changes.
I agree also.
We can all keep discussing this, but come Feb. 1 and if the City doesn’t have a substantially compliant Housing Element, we will be like Santa Monica where there has been a free for all and 4,000 housing not compliant with any local zoning had to be approved in nine months. https://smdp.com/2022/10/12/new-15-story-project-automatically-approved-due-to-late-housing-element/
While I agree that a straight reading of the Charter indicates that a vote is required for the proposed changes and the City’s flier is disingenuous at best, to the State and the courts the City Charter is not relevant if the City doesn’t meet State housing law requirements in time. The time for a vote is long gone.
Technically I don’t think the Charter requires a vote on the Housing Element – it is just a policy document that is part of the General Plan. It has serious ramifications but does not empower zoning changes or building projects. Multiple votes by the Planning Commission and Council are required to authorize those developments.
To adhere to the Charter, Council should put these new zoning reclassifications to a community vote, sooner than later, but after the HE is submitted.
The City does seem to be on track to build a low income project in the canyon by December 2024, without a community vote. Nonetheless, submitting the HE as currently drafted (with just a pinch more of SB analysis) could meet the RHNA target.
HCD took three months to review and reject Santa Monica so the City needs to get the first HE draft in by the end of this month to avoid the situation Santa Monica finds itself in.
The HCD letter rejecting Santa Monica’s draft HE was dated February 2022 so why are NorCal cities just now learning that the deadline for a compliant HE is the end of January, 2023?
Mr. Bhatia is referring to the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). It does allow a project with the required percentage of affordability to override local zoning, but subject to several potentially ambiguous findings (Lawyers will have a field day). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/38x5760j
However, the HAA does not exempt project approvals from CEQA. I don’t know why or if Santa Monica took advantage of all the delaying opportunities available through CEQA.
As long-time Piedmont residents, voting is very important to me and my family. Yet, there are differing legal opinions on whether or not we need a vote in Piedmont in adopting a housing element.
I wholeheartedly agree “Voters Rights” are of grave importance. However, the above headline implies that the city is trying to take away Piedmont citizen’s rights. Does the author think that the city is intentionally taking away our rights? I am not a lawyer, and as I understand it, there are many nuances to this issue. The city attorney has weighed in on this issue throughout the process of drafting a housing element and has issued an opinion that some may not agree with.
I also see a lack of discussion on how more housing(esp low to moderate-income housing) in Piedmont will benefit our community. As a gerontologist, I am particularly focused on our changing demographics. Piedmont’s population has not changed much since the 1960s, yet Piedmonters are blessed to be living much longer. As a result, even though many residents over 65 years of age sell their homes and emigrate out of Piedmont, many are choosing to stay here. This has resulted in far fewer young people in their 20s and 30s living here. Without young families, our schools suffer. This is a compounding problem that will only grow in coming decades. Let’s discuss this issue of voting maturely, voting is important and it is part of a greater whole.
Well said Elise. Voting is important which is probably why Piedmont established itself as a Charter city, giving its residents this unique right. The City Attorney’s opinion strikes me as more historical than legal – it’s just a recitation of how staff and Council interpret the Charter language and provides no legal basis for that position.
As others have said, a straight read of the Charter indicates a vote is required for a zoning reclassification. No vote is required on the Housing Element as it’s just a policy document. The Housing Element will initiate a review of the Charter and zoning rules within 2 years of adoption that could lead to a vote on Charter and zoning map changes in 2024, so there is time for a mature discussion. And there will be a new city administrator and Council soon so perhaps that discussion will be had. However, I think the City has to start a low income housing project in public land by 2024, so it seems equitable to the affected neighborhoods to have that discussion now.
I agree with Mr.Garrett Keating. A thought out HE plan can be submitted in order to be in compliance with State requirements. However, before implementation, residents have the right to vote on anything that requires rezoning.