Breaking: Monique's Move Could Block 8-Story Blockbuster at Old Mission

Santa Barbara's state senator is being bashed by the build-baby-build crowd for coming to the aid of constituents outraged by a sleazy project that would desecrate the most sacred space in town.

(Editor’s note: Ben Christopher, the ace reporter who covers housing for CalMatters, is reporting this morning that state Senator Monqiue Limon is quietly pushing legislation that would spare us from the vandalization of the Old Mission Santa Barbara , and the threat of mass casualties in a wildfire, by secretive shady out-of-town developers who want to take advantage of state law to ram an eight-story monstrosity into the neighborhood. The build-baby-build crowd may have their panties in a twist about this, but Newsmakers says: good on you Monique).

By Ben Christopher CalMatters

Earlier this year California lawmakers delivered an historic victory for champions of more housing construction by exempting most urban apartment developments from the California Environmental Quality Act, a 50-year-old statute that Yes In My Backyard advocates and the building industry have long blamed as an impediment to building more homes.

A bill proposed Monday night, just days before the end of the legislative session, would punch a very small hole in that landmark law that appears to apply to just one proposed apartment building in California — in the district represented by the incoming leader of the state Senate.

Senate Bill 158 would subject any project within a city of more than 85,000 but fewer than 95,000 people and within a county of between 440,000 and 455,000 people to the state’s environmental review law.

That only describes one place in California, according to 2020 Census data: Santa Barbara, a city represented by Sen. Monique Limón.

Earlier this year Democrats in the state Senate chose Limón as the body’s next leader. She is set to replace Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire, who is termed out in early 2026.

The legislation further narrows the exemption to any project that abuts a wetland, a creek and a state registered historical landmark. It also carves out projects larger than four acres and those that have made use of a particular state law known as the “builder’s remedy,” which allows developers to bypass local approval processes if a city is out of compliance with state housing planning law.

On social media, Jordan Grimes with the Bay Area nonprofit Greenbelt Alliance and a frequent poster on land use disputes, noted that all those provisions appear to describe a single 270-unit, eight-story building proposed for a site behind Santa Barbara’s historic mission. The project has been the subject of considerable ire among some of the affluent coastal city’s residents and elected leaders. In May, the Santa Barbara mayor called the project a “horrendous nightmare.”

The developers behind the project, going under the corporate name The Mission LLC, have sued the city multiple times, alleging that local officials have illegally delayed the project and denied it a religious-based property tax exemption.

Responding to a question from CalMatters in a written statement, Limón’s office denied that the bill was “designed to prevent a specific project from moving forward.”

“This bill clarifies narrow instances when environmental review, public input, and mitigation efforts are required on a development that poses a risk to safety,” the statement reads.

In response to a series of follow-up questions, Limón’s office confirmed the senator was responsible for the new legislative language, but refused to explain whether the Mission project is one of the “narrow instances” in which additional review is required and whether there are, in fact, any others.

Opponents of the Mission project, which is located at the mouth of a canyon north of Santa Barbara’s downtown, have raised concerns about wildfires and flooding risk.

The City of Santa Barbara has argued that the CEQA exemption law from earlier this year does not apply to the project. That’s based on the city’s interpretation of the law. The budget bill introduced this week would legally reinforce that position.

In an email, Santa Barbara Mayor Randy Rowse said he would not comment on the project, citing “frequent and continuing litigation with the applicants.”

In an unattributed statement from Mission LLC, the company slammed the deal and said it would sue, “as California prohibits legislation attacking a single project.”

“This bill is an example of the control of public policy by a few wealthy NIMBYs in an attempt to obstruct desperately needed low-income housing,” the company wrote. “The project, located in a wealthy area of Santa Barbara, would provide 54 low-income units and this attempt to block it demonstrates the kowtowing of some legislators to wealthy NIMBY constituents.”

The last-minute exemption is part of a broader budget trailer bill — legislation that is meant to direct state agencies on how to administer the year’s budget, but which in practice often become vehicles for a variety of policy changes. Unlike other legislation, budget bills are not authored by individual legislators, but by the entire budget committee.

This year has seen the Legislature take up a bevy of uber-ambitious housing production bills, aimed at making it easier for developers to build in the face of a chronic statewide housing affordability crisis. Throughout the year, a political schism has emerged between the Assembly, helmed by “Yes In My Backyard”-aligned Speaker Robert Rivas, and the Senate, which has been less receptive to that ideology.

For those hoping to divine how the Senate under Limón’s leadership might welcome pro-development legislation, the 11th-hour carve out is potentially telling.

“Is the incoming leader of the California senate sneakily trying to kill a proposed 250 unit apartment building in Santa Barbara via a budget trailer bill? It certainly seems like it!,” Grimes wrote on X.

You can subscribe to CalMatters here.