"This case is a story of state housing law working as intended to produce new housing while a resentful town tries to gum up the process, the lawyers wrote in their brief. The organizations are not parties in the case, but they filed a friend of the court brief to offer additional arguments, specialized knowledge, perspective or relevant information the court may want to consider before they rule on the case."
"In March, Los Gatos filed a lawsuit for clarification regarding the permit streamlining process for builder's remedy projects. The town interpreted the law to mean that developers only had one 90-day remedy period to submit missing information and resolve any issues with their applications. However, developers argued that they could have an indefinite number of 90-day periods to do so."
"The crux of the amicus brief is that the town knowingly filed for declaratory relief knowing that staff couldn't reject the applications outright. Instead, the nonprofits said, the town hired lawyers to help them find a way to reject the applications without facing legal consequences. They argue that the town did this to claim plausible deniability against accusations that it is trying to stop new housing and to take advantage of a gray area in the housing law while avoiding penalties"
Three pro-housing nonprofits filed an amicus brief at Santa Clara County Superior Court supporting developers in a lawsuit Los Gatos filed in March over interpretation of state housing law. The nonprofits argued the law is functioning to produce new housing while the town sought to obstruct projects. The dispute centers on whether developers get an indefinite series of 90-day remedy periods or only one 90-day period to fix applications. Los Gatos declared two projects, The Arya and The Luxe, incomplete. The nonprofits allege the town hired lawyers to find ways to reject applications and avoid legal consequences and penalties.
Read at www.mercurynews.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]