Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

No new ADUs here: When California law and homeowner association rules collide

News Feed
Friday, February 21, 2025

In summary He says state law gives him the right to turn his garage into an apartment. His HOA says it doesn’t. Who’s right? Adam Hardesty insists he wanted to do everything by the book.  Before moving forward with his plans to convert the garage of his three-story condo into a ground-floor apartment, he canvassed local architects and engineers to make sure a kitchenette, a bedroom and a bathroom could all be packed safely and legally into just 373 square feet.  He pored over local zoning maps, checked with the city of Carlsbad and got himself a building permit.  He sought and received the blessing of many of his immediate neighbors. He even emailed a planner at the state’s housing department to get his take on whether he was legally entitled to build what California law refers to as an “accessory dwelling unit.”  An unemployed project manager who has struggled to find work for more than a year, Hardesty had the time to do the research, the training to conduct it thoroughly and the financial rationale to turn his garage into a rental. “To help offset the housing crisis and also provide affordable housing, but also to provide a revenue source for my family — why not?” he said. What he didn’t count on was opposition from his own homeowners association — if only because he’s also the HOA board vice president. Hardesty floated the idea to his fellow board members late last summer. What followed was months of sternly worded legal missives, deadlocked negotiations and a heated battle over property rights that has pitted neighbor against neighbor across the Mystic Point Homeowners Association’s bucolic hillside subdivision along the coast north of San Diego. At the center of the debate is among the most divisive questions in California politics: Who has the final say about what gets built where? Construction at Adam Hardesty’s home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters The California Legislature has been on a decade-long tear trying to make it harder for locals to say “no” to new housing. They’ve passed bills that force cities and counties to plan for more residential density and approve projects without conditions, and that punish governments that don’t cooperate. A raft of California laws on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) have been particularly aggressive in stripping locals of their regulatory say-so. It’s not always clear how homeowners associations, the quasi-private governments that set and enforce neighborhood rules across so much of suburban California, fit into this new policy landscape. Not all of the state’s pro-housing mandates apply to HOAs. Sometimes the laws are ambiguous on the question. And even when a state statute explicitly overrides any contrary association covenants or restrictions, there’s no obvious enforcement body that stands at the ready to ensure the law is followed. When disagreements surface, they can get hashed out in court. That’s despite the fact that homes governed by these associations have been one of the fastest growing segments of the national housing supply for decades.  More than one-third of California’s housing stock, home to more than 14 million people, is regulated by a homeowners association, condo or residential co-op board, according to the Foundation for Community Association Research.  This has all turned the humble, frequently derided HOA into one of the last lines of defense in the battle for local control in California. The fabric of the community The pushback that Hardesty received was gentle at first. The garage conversion would be “precedent setting” for the Mystic Point Homeowners Association, board member Mike Cartabianco stressed to Hardesty in a text message from late August.  An influx of ADUs and a loss of garages could change the fabric of the community, worsen the parking situation and undercut the very reason “why we and other(s) bought here,” he said. Though he wasn’t categorically against the proposal, all of this made the plan “an uphill battle.” Cartabianco suggested that Hardesty consider “scaling down” the project, perhaps by removing the kitchenette, or by drawing upon the equity in his condo to meet his financial needs. Hardesty persisted, sending a letter of intent to the entire board. Official opposition soon followed.  Construction at Adam Hardesty’s home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters First: Adam Hardesty reviews the floor plans of the accessory dwelling unit he is building at his home. Last: Adam Hardesty looks through the construction at his home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Adam Flury, an attorney hired by the association, advised the board in an email to “absolutely deny” the request as a violation of the board’s governing documents. Hardesty responded, politely but firmly, that he would be moving ahead anyway. “Rest assured, this is coming down the pike and I would love for you all to participate in this project with me,” he wrote in an email.  Two weeks later he received a cease-and-desist letter. It warned Hardesty that he ran the risk of exposing himself “to legal consequences and unnecessary expense” if he didn’t let up. In an email response to CalMatters, Flury said that the “association does not comment on potential legal matters.” Neither Cartabianco nor HOA President Shauna Bligh responded to repeated efforts to speak with them. The Mystic Point ADU dispute is “ripe for litigation,” said Marco Gonzalez, an environmental and land use lawyer whom Hardesty hired to respond to the HOA’s cease and desist letter. “But you gotta have a homeowner with deep enough pockets and the risk profile to take it to the mat.” Hardesty, who is still without a steady job and claims to have already spent upward of $8,000 of his savings on the project, said he didn’t have deep enough pockets to keep paying Gonzalez.  For now, he is focused on construction. This month, he broke ground and began gutting his garage — without the HOA’s permission or apparent knowledge.  The price tag of fewer neighbors A homeowners association occupies the blurry line that separates private club from hyper-local government. Though their legal status is usually nonprofit, with each homeowner acting as a paying member, by enforcing rules on what people can build on their own property, they assume a role comparable to a town’s planning-and-building department.  Strict rules about development may be part of their appeal: A nationwide study of HOAs from 2019 found that homes regulated by associations are, on average, worth $13,500 more than comparable homes outside an HOA’s jurisdiction. But that premium is even higher in places with loose controls on development. In other words, people are often willing to pay more to live in an HOA, at least in part, to buy the peace of mind that an apartment building won’t unexpectedly pop up on their block. The Mystic Point townhome community in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters A central function of HOAs is to “maintain property values,” said Ron Cheung, an Oberlin College economist, who has conducted similar research on homeowners associations. “The way they do this is, one, by providing better public services than the city does and, two, by enforcing regulations on things — like the appearance of the home and the behavior of the residents and on what you can build and can’t build.” In 2019, the California Legislature passed a law to keep HOAs from enforcing such regulations on accessory dwelling units. The bill, authored by former Burbank Democratic Assemblymember Laura Friedman, voided any association rule that “effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts” the construction of ADUs. That’s the law that Hardesty says gives him the right to ignore his board’s legal warnings. The rub is that the law applies to parcels of land that are “zoned for single-family residential use.”  Hardesty lives in a condominium six-plex.  According to Gonzalez, Hardesty’s former attorney, the homeowners association’s lawyer argued that because the zoning map allows for more than just single-family homes, Hardesty’s parcel is not “zoned for single-family residential use” and therefore the law doesn’t apply. What applies instead is the association’s ban on using garages for anything other than cars. Gonzalez countered that because single-family homes are one of many uses allowed in the subdevelopment, the parcel is still, in fact, “zoned for single-family residential use,” even if it’s zoned for other things too, and that the garage rule is an effective ADU prohibition barred by the 2019 law. Friedman, now a member of Congress, did not respond to CalMatters’ questions about the law’s intent. HOAs vs ADUs: A “muddy” area of law Hardesty’s interpretation of state law is shared by at least one analyst at the state’s housing department. After Hardesty wrote to the department’s ADU team, David Barboza, a staff housing policy specialist at the California Department of Housing and Community Development, wrote back. “I don’t agree that State ADU Law is inapplicable to condo developments,” he told Hardesty. Because “single-family residences are a permitted use” on his property, the pro-ADU law likely applies.  But that interpretation doesn’t necessarily have the force of law and, in any case, the department has no plans to get involved in these types of disputes. Adam Hardesty looks through floor plans at his home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Hardesty is currently converting the garage of his three-story condo into a ground-floor apartment, despite opposition from his own Homeowners Association. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters If it were Carlsbad’s planning department telling Hardesty not to convert his garage, that would fall under the state housing department’s regulatory authority. But HOAs are different, said department spokesperson Jennifer Hanson. “We do not have the ability to take enforcement actions directed at HOAs,” she said.  Jeanne Grove, a real-estate lawyer with the law firm Nixon Peabody who regularly represents HOAs, said the legal question is “really muddy for homeowners associations” and that it’s not always clear where their contractual responsibilities to enforce their own rules end and state housing law begins. Gonzalez, Hardesty’s former lawyer, said he isn’t surprised by the association’s position. “HOA attorneys are pre-programmed to say ‘no,’” he said. But though the debate rests on a relatively narrow grammatical question, it’s an important one for a state in the throes of a chronic housing shortage and affordability crisis, he added.  “There are, I would, expect hundreds, if not thousands, of condo homeowners who have no idea they might be able to convert their garage,” said Gonzalez. Some of them might even be Hardesty’s neighbors.  Standing in the shared driveway of Hardesty’s condo-plex, Barbara Malone, who lives just up the street, said she was initially skeptical when Adam told her about the project. Now she’s inspired.  Malone is 75 and has 10 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. “That’s why I have no money,” she said. She works at Lowe’s Home Improvement part time to supplement her modest 401k and Social Security payments. Years ago, she carpeted over her garage, turning it into a playroom. But she said the prospect of converting it into a source of passive income would be life-changing. “For me, it would be a way that I could quit working, I think, if I could put one of these in my garage,” she said. “I would like to do the same thing.” She said she’s already reached out to her immediate neighbors and received their blessing to break ground. Adriana Heldiz contributed to this story. Read more on California housing Why California keeps putting homes where fires burn LA fires expose California’s difficult road to navigate between disaster risk and solving the state’s housing crisis. January 16, 2025January 16, 2025 California city makes ‘aiding’ or ‘abetting’ a homeless camp illegal Outreach workers in the Bay Area city of Fremont worry the new ordinance could target them, despite assurances from the city. February 12, 2025February 13, 2025

He says state law gives him the right to turn his garage into an apartment. His HOA says it doesn’t. Who's right?

A person wearing a dark pink collared shirt and blue jeans stands inside a garage under construction.

In summary

He says state law gives him the right to turn his garage into an apartment. His HOA says it doesn’t. Who’s right?

Adam Hardesty insists he wanted to do everything by the book. 

Before moving forward with his plans to convert the garage of his three-story condo into a ground-floor apartment, he canvassed local architects and engineers to make sure a kitchenette, a bedroom and a bathroom could all be packed safely and legally into just 373 square feet. 

He pored over local zoning maps, checked with the city of Carlsbad and got himself a building permit. 

He sought and received the blessing of many of his immediate neighbors.

He even emailed a planner at the state’s housing department to get his take on whether he was legally entitled to build what California law refers to as an “accessory dwelling unit.” 

An unemployed project manager who has struggled to find work for more than a year, Hardesty had the time to do the research, the training to conduct it thoroughly and the financial rationale to turn his garage into a rental.

“To help offset the housing crisis and also provide affordable housing, but also to provide a revenue source for my family — why not?” he said.

What he didn’t count on was opposition from his own homeowners association — if only because he’s also the HOA board vice president.

Hardesty floated the idea to his fellow board members late last summer. What followed was months of sternly worded legal missives, deadlocked negotiations and a heated battle over property rights that has pitted neighbor against neighbor across the Mystic Point Homeowners Association’s bucolic hillside subdivision along the coast north of San Diego.

At the center of the debate is among the most divisive questions in California politics: Who has the final say about what gets built where?

The inside of a grage under construction that includes a pile of dirt, a large grey garbage container and ladders.
Construction at Adam Hardesty’s home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters

The California Legislature has been on a decade-long tear trying to make it harder for locals to say “no” to new housing. They’ve passed bills that force cities and counties to plan for more residential density and approve projects without conditions, and that punish governments that don’t cooperate. A raft of California laws on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) have been particularly aggressive in stripping locals of their regulatory say-so.

It’s not always clear how homeowners associations, the quasi-private governments that set and enforce neighborhood rules across so much of suburban California, fit into this new policy landscape. Not all of the state’s pro-housing mandates apply to HOAs. Sometimes the laws are ambiguous on the question. And even when a state statute explicitly overrides any contrary association covenants or restrictions, there’s no obvious enforcement body that stands at the ready to ensure the law is followed. When disagreements surface, they can get hashed out in court.

That’s despite the fact that homes governed by these associations have been one of the fastest growing segments of the national housing supply for decades.  More than one-third of California’s housing stock, home to more than 14 million people, is regulated by a homeowners association, condo or residential co-op board, according to the Foundation for Community Association Research. 

This has all turned the humble, frequently derided HOA into one of the last lines of defense in the battle for local control in California.

The fabric of the community

The pushback that Hardesty received was gentle at first.

The garage conversion would be “precedent setting” for the Mystic Point Homeowners Association, board member Mike Cartabianco stressed to Hardesty in a text message from late August. 

An influx of ADUs and a loss of garages could change the fabric of the community, worsen the parking situation and undercut the very reason “why we and other(s) bought here,” he said. Though he wasn’t categorically against the proposal, all of this made the plan “an uphill battle.” Cartabianco suggested that Hardesty consider “scaling down” the project, perhaps by removing the kitchenette, or by drawing upon the equity in his condo to meet his financial needs.

Hardesty persisted, sending a letter of intent to the entire board. Official opposition soon followed. 

A medium-sized pile of dirt sits in the middle of a garage under construction. Next to the pile of dirt are two cemenet holes with plumbing pipes.
Construction at Adam Hardesty’s home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters

Adam Flury, an attorney hired by the association, advised the board in an email to “absolutely deny” the request as a violation of the board’s governing documents. Hardesty responded, politely but firmly, that he would be moving ahead anyway. “Rest assured, this is coming down the pike and I would love for you all to participate in this project with me,” he wrote in an email. 

Two weeks later he received a cease-and-desist letter. It warned Hardesty that he ran the risk of exposing himself “to legal consequences and unnecessary expense” if he didn’t let up.

In an email response to CalMatters, Flury said that the “association does not comment on potential legal matters.” Neither Cartabianco nor HOA President Shauna Bligh responded to repeated efforts to speak with them.

The Mystic Point ADU dispute is “ripe for litigation,” said Marco Gonzalez, an environmental and land use lawyer whom Hardesty hired to respond to the HOA’s cease and desist letter. “But you gotta have a homeowner with deep enough pockets and the risk profile to take it to the mat.”

Hardesty, who is still without a steady job and claims to have already spent upward of $8,000 of his savings on the project, said he didn’t have deep enough pockets to keep paying Gonzalez. 

For now, he is focused on construction. This month, he broke ground and began gutting his garage — without the HOA’s permission or apparent knowledge. 

The price tag of fewer neighbors

A homeowners association occupies the blurry line that separates private club from hyper-local government.

Though their legal status is usually nonprofit, with each homeowner acting as a paying member, by enforcing rules on what people can build on their own property, they assume a role comparable to a town’s planning-and-building department. 

Strict rules about development may be part of their appeal: A nationwide study of HOAs from 2019 found that homes regulated by associations are, on average, worth $13,500 more than comparable homes outside an HOA’s jurisdiction. But that premium is even higher in places with loose controls on development. In other words, people are often willing to pay more to live in an HOA, at least in part, to buy the peace of mind that an apartment building won’t unexpectedly pop up on their block.

An aerial view of a cul-de-sac with beige and brown homes lined on either side of the street.
The Mystic Point townhome community in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters

A central function of HOAs is to “maintain property values,” said Ron Cheung, an Oberlin College economist, who has conducted similar research on homeowners associations. “The way they do this is, one, by providing better public services than the city does and, two, by enforcing regulations on things — like the appearance of the home and the behavior of the residents and on what you can build and can’t build.”

In 2019, the California Legislature passed a law to keep HOAs from enforcing such regulations on accessory dwelling units. The bill, authored by former Burbank Democratic Assemblymember Laura Friedman, voided any association rule that “effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts” the construction of ADUs.

That’s the law that Hardesty says gives him the right to ignore his board’s legal warnings. The rub is that the law applies to parcels of land that are “zoned for single-family residential use.” 

Hardesty lives in a condominium six-plex. 

According to Gonzalez, Hardesty’s former attorney, the homeowners association’s lawyer argued that because the zoning map allows for more than just single-family homes, Hardesty’s parcel is not “zoned for single-family residential use” and therefore the law doesn’t apply. What applies instead is the association’s ban on using garages for anything other than cars.

Gonzalez countered that because single-family homes are one of many uses allowed in the subdevelopment, the parcel is still, in fact, “zoned for single-family residential use,” even if it’s zoned for other things too, and that the garage rule is an effective ADU prohibition barred by the 2019 law.

Friedman, now a member of Congress, did not respond to CalMatters’ questions about the law’s intent.

HOAs vs ADUs: A “muddy” area of law

Hardesty’s interpretation of state law is shared by at least one analyst at the state’s housing department.

After Hardesty wrote to the department’s ADU team, David Barboza, a staff housing policy specialist at the California Department of Housing and Community Development, wrote back. “I don’t agree that State ADU Law is inapplicable to condo developments,” he told Hardesty. Because “single-family residences are a permitted use” on his property, the pro-ADU law likely applies. 

But that interpretation doesn’t necessarily have the force of law and, in any case, the department has no plans to get involved in these types of disputes.

A person wearing a dark pink collared shirt and blue jeans uses their right index finger to point to floor plans laid on top of a white table inside a garage under construction.
Adam Hardesty looks through floor plans at his home in Carlsbad on Feb. 19, 2025. Hardesty is currently converting the garage of his three-story condo into a ground-floor apartment, despite opposition from his own Homeowners Association. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters

If it were Carlsbad’s planning department telling Hardesty not to convert his garage, that would fall under the state housing department’s regulatory authority. But HOAs are different, said department spokesperson Jennifer Hanson.

“We do not have the ability to take enforcement actions directed at HOAs,” she said. 

Jeanne Grove, a real-estate lawyer with the law firm Nixon Peabody who regularly represents HOAs, said the legal question is “really muddy for homeowners associations” and that it’s not always clear where their contractual responsibilities to enforce their own rules end and state housing law begins.

Gonzalez, Hardesty’s former lawyer, said he isn’t surprised by the association’s position. “HOA attorneys are pre-programmed to say ‘no,’” he said. But though the debate rests on a relatively narrow grammatical question, it’s an important one for a state in the throes of a chronic housing shortage and affordability crisis, he added. 

“There are, I would, expect hundreds, if not thousands, of condo homeowners who have no idea they might be able to convert their garage,” said Gonzalez.

Some of them might even be Hardesty’s neighbors. 

Standing in the shared driveway of Hardesty’s condo-plex, Barbara Malone, who lives just up the street, said she was initially skeptical when Adam told her about the project. Now she’s inspired. 

Malone is 75 and has 10 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. “That’s why I have no money,” she said. She works at Lowe’s Home Improvement part time to supplement her modest 401k and Social Security payments. Years ago, she carpeted over her garage, turning it into a playroom. But she said the prospect of converting it into a source of passive income would be life-changing.

“For me, it would be a way that I could quit working, I think, if I could put one of these in my garage,” she said. “I would like to do the same thing.”

She said she’s already reached out to her immediate neighbors and received their blessing to break ground.

Adriana Heldiz contributed to this story.

Read more on California housing

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Alabama Utility Commission Allowed to Hike Prices Behind Closed Doors, Judge Rules

A judge has ruled that Alabama's Public Service Commission can continue holding private meetings to decide fuel price hikes

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Alabama's utility regulators can continue to hold closed-door meetings to determine price hikes, in an apparent departure from common practices in neighboring states, a circuit court judge ruled.The decision on Monday rejected a lawsuit filed by Southern Environmental Law Center on behalf of Energy Alabama, a nonprofit that advocates for renewable energy sources. The watchdog group was denied access to two meetings in 2024 where the public service commission decided how Alabama Power — the state's largest electricity provider — should adjust prices based on volatility in global fuel costs. Montgomery circuit Judge Brooke Reid ruled against the environmental advocates in a one-page order after a hearing in June. She said the group's rights had not been substantially violated. At the June hearing, Reid said the commission’s “interpretation of its own rules should be given deference.”Christina Tidwell, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, blasted Reid’s decision in a statement on Monday.“While other Southern states have meaningful public engagement in fuel cost proceedings, Alabama Power customers will continue to be shut out of the process,” Tidwell wrote. The Alabama Public Service Commission has rules that govern how Alabama Power can change electricity prices to offset increases in fuel costs, which tend to be volatile. Those rules say that the public is entitled to hear evidence and participate in proceedings that adjust fuel costs to ensure these changes are “just and reasonable.”The lawsuit said there have been only two public fuel cost hearings since the commission’s current rules were adopted in 1981. By contrast, the Georgia Public Service Commission, which regulates a sister company of Alabama Power, has held at least 26 public formal fuel cost proceedings, according to the complaint.The last public meeting in Alabama was called because the 2008 financial crisis caused fuel prices to skyrocket rapidly, according to attorneys for the state commission. They argued that the commission hasn't technically initiated a new proceeding since that change 16 years ago, even though rates have been adjusted over 15 times since then, so they are not compelled to invite public input.Attorneys for the state also argued that the public has “plenty of opportunities for input” even without public meetings, because the commission publishes monthly reports on fuel prices online, and rate changes are subject to public appeal. Alabama Power is a subsidiary of Atlanta-based Southern Company, which reported $4.4 billion in profit in 2024, according to annual shareholder reports. Alabama Power serves about 1.5 million of the state’s roughly 5 million residents.Most Alabama residents get electricity through municipal or cooperatively owned utilities. In 2023, the average Alabama Power consumer was paying about $159 per month, compared to the statewide average of approximately $132 per month, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Alabama Power did not respond to an emailed request for comment on Wednesday afternoon inquiring about recent rates.After the ruling, Energy Alabama's executive director Daniel Tait said in a statement that the decision was “disappointing” for “Alabamians who have no choice but to pay the high cost of fossil fuels on their Alabama Power bill.”Riddle is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - June 2025

California overhauls landmark environmental protection rules

Governor Gavin Newsom says bureaucratic roadblocks have made it difficult to build housing in the most populous stateCalifornia is overhauling its landmark environmental protection rules, a change state leaders say is essential to address the state’s housing shortage and homelessness crisis.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, had threatened to reject the state budget passed last Friday unless lawmakers overhauled the California Environmental Quality Act, or Ceqa, a 1970s law that requires strict examination of any new development for its impact on the environment. Continue reading...

California is overhauling its landmark environmental protection rules, a change state leaders say is essential to address the state’s housing shortage and homelessness crisis.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, had threatened to reject the state budget passed last Friday unless lawmakers overhauled the California Environmental Quality Act, or Ceqa, a 1970s law that requires strict examination of any new development for its impact on the environment.The governor and housing advocates say that Ceqa, although well-intentioned at the time, put up bureaucratic roadblocks that have made it increasingly difficult to build housing in the most populous state in the US.Lawmakers passed the transformative measure despite opposition from environmental groups. Newsom called it a step toward solving the state’s housing affordability problem.“This was too urgent, too important, to allow the process to unfold as it has for the last generation,” he told reporters at a news conference after signing the bill.The new rules were passed in two so-called “budget trailer” bills. Under the new rules, large swaths of “infill housing”, or homes built in and around existing development, will be exempt from Ceqa reviews. There will be some exceptions, including for very large projects and construction in very low-density areas, but most homes and apartments built in cities will no longer be subject to the review.“This is what we’ve all been waiting for – a long-overdue step to stop Ceqa from being weaponized against housing,” said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, who sponsored one of the bills. “We’re taking a major step toward building desperately needed homes faster, fairer, and with more certainty.”The new regulations also include exemptions for hi-tech manufacturing sites, a move proponents say will stimulate growth but critics say will facilitate industrial development in low-income neighborhoods.The exemptions, and in particular those for manufacturing sites, have been vehemently opposed by some social justice and environmental groups. “Together, these bills undermine the public participation process and the right to protect their community from environmental and health risks,” said the Western Center on Law & Poverty.“We’re in a nature crisis, we’re seeing unprecedented loss of wildlife, and that’s to be made worse with this bill,” said Laura Deehan with the group Environment California in a committee hearing on Monday.Earlier this year, Newsom waived some Ceqa rules for victims of wildfires in southern California, creating an opening for the state to re-examine the law that critics say hampers development and drives up building costs.The state budget passed last week pares back a number of progressive priorities, including a landmark healthcare expansion for low-income adult immigrants without legal status, to close a $12bn deficit.

Coalition fears spending cuts could idle central Oregon trail maintenance

Jana Johnson of Deschutes Trails Coalition says federal funding cuts will indefinitely pause trail maintenance performed by professionals.

Each summer the Deschutes Trails Coalition dispatches a small crew into the forest around Bend to improve trail conditions for myriad hikers. They remove fallen trees, repair trails impacted by erosion and cut back overgrown vegetation. But those involved with trail maintenance are increasingly worried the work relied on by both locals and visitors will soon come to a screeching halt. Jana Johnson, executive director of the nonprofit coalition, says federal funding cuts ordered by the Trump administration will indefinitely pause trail maintenance performed by professionals. A hiring freeze for seasonal workers will only compound problems for the Forest Service. “There’s obviously a lot of staffing shortages. There have been firings. People have been leaving our federal agencies due to the current budget and offers from the current administration,” said Johnson. “The public needs to know that our public lands are struggling right now.” READ MORE: Oregon hikers asked to ‘step up’ as federal cuts threaten Northwest trails The Deschutes Trails Coalition — in the third year of a three-year pilot project to pay for trail maintenance — was expecting a $200,000 grant to pay for a trail crew to operate through the summer. But that funding has been canceled, casting doubt about how the nonprofit will pay for trail maintenance in the years ahead. The coalition planned to stretch the funding over the next three years, supplemented by grants. “But without that $200,000, we are just left scrambling to try to figure out how we are going to fund them,” said Johnson. Concerns that trail maintenance won’t happen this year on the Deschutes and other national forests reflect broader worries that the Trump administration is sidelining environmental protections and recreation in favor of resource extraction. Executive orders are already in place to increase logging and fossil fuel extraction on public lands. The Deschutes River Trail runs through Tumalo State Park in central Oregon near Bend. One section of the trail follows a metal boardwalk over a field of boulders. Jamie Hale/The OregonianNate Wyeth, vice president of strategy for Visit Bend, says abandoning professional trail maintenance won’t go unnoticed by the public. “Our unparalleled access to outdoor recreation is the top reason many folks visit or live in Bend, and the current federal funding crisis will undoubtedly impact trail conditions, creating a negative visitor experience,” Wyeth said. An inquiry to the U.S. Forest Service from the Bulletin related to the disappearance of funding for trail maintenance went unanswered. Maintaining trails in national forests and other public lands has only become more challenging in recent years, due to increased demand from the public to hike and explore the outdoors. Project work has piled up due to increased use. “We already have millions of dollars of backlog of maintenance that needs to be done on our trails,” said Johnson. “So we’re just going to keep falling further behind if we don’t have crews that are working on maintenance and projects.” While volunteer crews occasionally maintain local trails, the Deschutes Trail Coalition crew is the only paid, professional crew working on the Deschutes National Forest. Deschutes County Commissioner Tony DeBone acknowledged that the Trump administration is tightening the purse strings, impacting groups like the trails coalition. “These are times of action, obviously, from Washington D.C. when the dollars are stopping in different directions,” said DeBone. “People could or need to think differently this year,” he added. “This is the time where if those resources aren’t there, what’s the next plan? Being able to open up a trail can be done in partnership with the federal government.” DeBone suggested local organizations like the Deschutes Trail Coalition find out what is possible to accomplish. “Volunteers can get quite a bit done,” he said. Trail maintenance on the Deschutes National Forest usually starts in May and continues until mid-October. Johnson said there are some funds leftover from a year ago along with some new grants that can be used to get some work done at the start of the season. But the coalition’s account will be drained fairly soon, she predicts. “We desperately need funds,” Johnson said. Courtney Braun, co-owner of Wanderlust Tours in Bend, said she is anxious about what federal funding cuts mean for national forests’ partner organizations and public lands. “We feel this could impact not only the health and maintenance of the forest including trails, but could impact visitor safety without as many boots on the ground or trail maintenance,” said Braun. “This also will affect future projects of trail building that will delay some major improvements for both our community and visitors alike.” Braun said she hopes the community can “rally around” public lands and support federal employees who have been left with large funding gaps in their departments. “We can encourage visitors to really lean into volunteering and understanding or educating themselves about the lands upon which we recreate,” said Braun. “Hopefully with all of our powers combined we can still offer a high quality visitor experience. It just may look a bit different.”Approximately two dozen organizations conduct volunteer trail maintenance in Central Oregon, including: • Sisters Trail Alliance • Oregon Equestrian Trails • Central Oregon Trail Alliance • Friends of the Central Cascades Wilderness • Central Oregon Nordic Club — Michael Kohn, The Bulletin

Hawaii Spent Millions on Housing for the Homeless. Show Us the Receipts

A Honolulu Civil Beat review found that the state agency in charge of Hawaii’s homeless villages lacks records to show how millions paid to a nonprofit to build hundreds of housing units was actually spent

The state agency in charge of Hawaiʻi’s homeless villages lacks the records to show how millions of dollars paid to a nonprofit to build hundreds of housing units was actually spent, a Civil Beat review of contract documents and invoices found.Since late 2023, the state has issued more than $37.1 million in no-bid contracts to HomeAid Hawaiʻi to build small dwellings as part of Gov. Josh Green’s signature Kauhale Initiative.While HomeAid has provided the Department of Human Services with balance sheets and supporting documents showing how it used state money for some of its projects, the state doesn’t have receipts or other documents detailing the specific use of public money for other projects.DHS told Civil Beat that some of those projects are not finished and will be subject to agency audits once they are.Now, Green wants $50 million more from the Legislature for his program to address homelessness. The Legislature has yet to agree on that funding as lawmakers consider what requirements to attach to the money to build kauhale villages across the state.House and Senate lawmakers have disagreed on the terms of the kauhale bill and must hash out differences during a conference committee, which has not yet been scheduled. A key point of contention is whether to require at least two bids for the construction of the villages.The Kauhale Initiative is meant to solve one of the state’s critical social issues. After running for governor on a campaign to address Hawaiʻi’s housing crisis, Green declared a state emergency on homelessness in 2023. Oʻahu’s annual Point-In-Time count at the time tallied more than 6,223 homeless people, more than half of them living outside. Green’s team quickly built 12 kauhale statewide. With the procurement code suspended under the state of emergency, Hawaiʻi waived competitive bidding and went with a no-bid development contractor, HomeAid Hawaiʻi, to implement the program. The initiative calls for creating “affordable spaces for housing and healing our people, through intentional ‘kauhale’ design and operation.”Critics, including of late Green’s former homelessness coordinator John Mizuno, have raised questions about operating costs of some kauhale. And Civil Beat’s review of construction expenditures highlights potential lapses in the Department of Human Services’ oversight of those projects.The department was unable to provide documents to show spending by HomeAid on two of the priciest kauhale projects to date — Middle Street’s Phase 2 and another one in Kahului on Maui — totaling more than $14 million. Work on those projects has just recently begun, officials said, although the nonprofit has received about $2 million up front.Details on two other contracts were also lacking. For one of those contracts – to deliver 273 homes statewide – HomeAid CEO Kimo Carvalho billed the state for nearly the entire cost of the contract all at once and provided almost no detail on how funds were used.On another contract for the Alana Ola Pono kauhale in Iwilei, the state paid out $2.5 million – half the value of the contract – up front with only a brief description of work that would be performed. Details on what became of the rest of the money weren’t provided in response to a records request from Civil Beat. That project opened in December, but is about two weeks away from completion, Carvalho said.Much of the work to review invoices was done by Jun Yang, who at the time was an employee of the Department of Transportation but also part of a kauhale team formed to aid Mizuno. Yang was so deeply involved that at one point, when there was a hold up in payment from DHS to HomeAid in September, Yang told Carvalho that if HomeAid staff sent payment request forms “we will get them taken care of.”Yang took over the top job from Mizuno in February.DHS Deputy Director Joseph Campos told Civil Beat on Wednesday that he recognizes his agency’s responsibility to the public and to legislators. The department has many processes to review the expenditures, he said, and it is not trying to skirt accountability.“Although we utilize the authority of the emergency order not to do a formal bid process, that does not mean we go willy nilly in choosing whatever we want.”Despite the absence of backup documentation to prove it in some cases, Campos said, “almost on a daily basis, we’re price-engineering or value-engineering a contract to make sure that we’re getting the best possible price out there.” Bill To Require Competitive Bidding In Question The House has sought to address questions of accountability by requiring at least two bids from builders. But the Senate removed the requirement after Yang testified that requiring two bids could delay development of projects. House Housing Committee Chairman Luke Evslin, who had amended the kauhale bill to include the two-bid requirement, said he couldn’t say what position House conferees will take during the negotiations to reconcile the two versions. Evslin has been named one of the co-chairs of the conference committee.An older version of the kauhale bill required “at least two bidders for any kauhale project”, however it was dropped in more recent versions.“For my own personal preference, the two-bid requirement makes a lot of sense to ensure accountability and efficiency,” Evslin said.Evslin acknowledged that no-bid contracts are allowed under Green’s emergency proclamation on homelessness, which suspends the state procurement code. But Evslin said requiring at least two bids makes sense as Green’s initiative matures from an emergency policy into a permanent endeavor.“Our hope is to transition the Kauhale Initiative into something that is sustainable,” he said. Green declined an interview request to discuss the kauhale bill. His spokesperson, Makana McClellan, said the administration would wait until after session to talk about active bills. Mizuno also declined to comment.McClellan said that HomeAId’s kauhale projects are routinely reviewed for compliance by the state Attorney General’s Office. How To Make The Program More Effective The rift over the two-bid requirement reflects a difference of opinion between the former and current coordinators in charge of overseeing Green’s Statewide Office on Homelessness and Housing Solutions. The overall philosophy, which isn’t disputed, is that it’s better for people and less expensive for the state to create tiny home villages with support services than to provide services to people on the street. The dispute involves how to get there.Mizuno, a longtime former lawmaker whom Green appointed to the position in December 2023, testified in February in favor of requiring two bids to build kauhale. Evslin’s housing committee amended the bill to incorporate the request.Diesel fuel and equipment to provide electricity cost $21,032 just for April — which came out to more than $1,000 a month per tiny home — according to invoices from Sunbelt Rentals examined by Civil Beat. In contrast, the average monthly bill for a full-sized residential home on Oahu is $202, according to Hawaiian Electric Co.During a tour of several properties Mizuno showed that monthly cost for another kauhale, located in a converted residential home, was just over $1,300 per bed.Generally a staunch advocate of Green’s initiative, Mizuno said he was “very concerned with off-grid kauhale.” At the time, Green said the off-grid kauhale were merely a bridge to get people off the street and into homes.By month’s end, Mizuno had stepped down from the top post to be Green’s special advisor on homelessness, replaced by Yang, who previously had been homelessness coordinator for the Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation.Less than a month later, on March 12, Yang requested that lawmakers remove the two-bid requirement for kauhale construction contracts during testimony in a joint hearing of the Senate committees on Health and Human Services and Housing.Echoing Department of Human Services testimony, Yang said he was “concerned that the two-bid minimum may delay project development in certain communities if only one bid is received.” Documents Show Irregularities Those records included invoices and supporting documents typical of large construction projects and final reports required by the contracts. The request initially focused on the Middle Street and Iwilei kauhale.The department’s first response to the request two weeks later didn’t include documents detailing expenditures. Instead, the department just provided copies of the contracts themselves.The agency eventually scanned and turned over copies of invoices and supporting documents for most of the kauhale projects on April 11. It provided extensive documentation for the Middle Street project’s first phase.But there were notable irregularities concerning other projects.For example, HomeAid was granted a contract in June to provide 273 tiny home units at a cost of $5.8 million. Payment was supposed to be made in four installments between June and September, with invoices and documents accompanying each installment.Instead, HomeAid sent one invoice in August, covering $174,000 worth of work, and another in October for $5.6 million. The majority of those funds went to the broad category of “Consulting and Non Employee Expense.” There’s no breakdown of what that entailed.“I believe we’re still working through the process,” Campos said of the project. “I believe we’re only halfway through on that one.”Despite the lack of publicly available accounting on some of these contracts, the department was looking at what the payments were for. Carvalho said his team and state officials meet weekly to review expenses on projects.Yang was the subject matter expert on the kauhale initiative, Campos said, which is why he was deeply involved in reviewing invoices.In one instance, Carvalho emailed Yang on Sept. 13 to check on reimbursements for money spent on kauhale in Kahului and Iwilei, as well as other projects in Kāneʻohe and Kalihi.“Would you mind helping me to track these down?” Carvalho wrote.Yang replied a few hours later, telling Carvalho to have staff prepare payment request forms. Yang even checked in with Campos’ secretary, asking her to forward other invoices for payment.He asked Carvalho to send a coversheet and a payment form for HomeAid’s 43-unit kauhale in Iwilei.“We will process the check for $2.5 million,” Yang wrote.HomeAid sent the state an invoice a week later. HomeAid’s Iwilei contract requires it to provide an itemization of expenses, timesheets or receipts. But there are no supporting documents to show how HomeAid spent the money on the Iwilei kauhale.Instead, there is merely a description in the invoice summarizing work performed, including erosion control, installation of a dust fence and barriers, construction and environmental services and site work. None of these costs are itemized, and there’s no accounting for what was paid to various subcontractors.Campos explained that those were upfront costs that wouldn’t necessarily be accounted for at this stage. Once projects like the Iwilei kauhale are completed, Campos said the public would be able to review the audits on those projects’ costs.Carvalho acknowledged that HomeAid is behind on providing invoices for the Iwilei project.“It doesn’t mean that the state’s not aware of what is being billed every month,” he said. “There’s still at least some accountability along the way.”The state also couldn’t provide documents concerning two newer projects. HomeAid was given a $6.7 million contract in November to complete the second phase of a kauhale on Middle Street. It called for up to 30 housing units, in addition to the 20 already at the site.In December, HomeAid was given a $7.9 million contract for a kauhale project in Kahului.Both contracts called for $1 million to be paid to HomeAid up front. HomeAid was required to account for those expenses, according to the contracts. The contracts also say that subsequent payments would be made in monthly installments after submission of invoices and supporting documentation.Asked about the status of those projects and records detailing spending, Carvalho said that work has just recently begun on both of those projects.“There hasn’t been a lot of work to spend on,” he said. ‘Where Is The Accountability?’ Lawmakers have also had a hard time getting details about HomeAid’s work on other housing projects.Rep. Elle Cochran, who represents Lahaina, has asked DHS for documentation concerning construction of Ka La’i Ola, a village of temporary homes for fire survivors in her district. The project cost $185 million, or $411,000 per home, including massive infrastructure improvements for the land, which will later be used by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. The project opened in January.Cochran said she asked for documentation called for by DHS’s construction contract with HomeAid, including interim reports and a final accounting for the project. Emails from Campos to Cochran show the agency is still working on her request.Regardless of the emergency proclamation suspending the procurement law, Cochran said it’s fair to ask for an accounting now that Ka La’i Ola has been built.“If this type of money has been expended and given, then where is the breakdown? Where is the proof? Where is the receipt?” she asked. “Where is the accountability?”This story was originally published by Honolulu Civil Beat and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Romania promises laws to deal with brown bears as population estimate doubles

Country may be home to as many as 13,000 bears, the highest total by far in Europe outside RussiaRomania may be home to as many as 13,000 brown bears, almost twice as many as previously thought, the country’s forestry research institute has said, as officials promised new laws to allow communities to deal with “crisis bear situations”.The institute’s study of 25 counties in the Carpathian mountains was the first to use DNA samples from material such as faeces and hair. Previous estimates based on prints and sightings put the bear population at less than 8,000. Continue reading...

Romania may be home to as many as 13,000 brown bears, almost twice as many as previously thought, the country’s forestry research institute has said, as officials promised new laws to allow communities to deal with “crisis bear situations”.The institute’s study of 25 counties in the Carpathian mountains was the first to use DNA samples from material such as faeces and hair. Previous estimates based on prints and sightings put the bear population at less than 8,000.According to environment ministry figures, bears have killed 26 people and severely injured 274 others over the past 20 years in Romania, the most recent fatality being a 19-year-old hiker who was mauled to death on a popular Carpathian trail last July.The government last year more than doubled its authorised cull of brown bears, a protected species in the EU, to 481 after recording more than 7,500 emergency calls to signal bear sightings in 2023 – more than twice the previous year’s total.MPs argue “overpopulation” is leading to an increase in attacks, an assertion disputed by environmental groups who say the focus must be shifted towards prevention, by keeping bears away from communities and targeting specific “problem bears”.Germany’s foreign ministry last week updated its Romania travel advice, noting that bears were increasingly venturing into residential areas and along roads, leading to “dangerous encounters with humans”. It urged travellers to heed local warnings.Based on an analysis of about 24,000 samples collected over three years since 2022, the institute’s study, published late last week, concluded there were between 10,419 and 12,770 individuals living in Romania – by far Europe’s largest brown bear population outside Russia.A brown bear in a summer field in Romania’s Carpathian mountains. Photograph: Erika Eros/AlamyWorld Wildlife Fund (WWF) Romania has since questioned its methods, saying genetic studies were usually conducted over a much shorter period, but the institute has said it considers the survey 95% accurate.The Romanian environment minister, Mircea Fechet, said he would lobby the European Commission to lift the bears’ protected status. The EU’s habitats directive allows the animal to be killed only in exceptional circumstances and as a last resort.“We have to intervene,” Fechet told local media. “The specialists say the optimal bear population is around 4,000.”skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionHe also promised to introduce a law allowing local officials to bypass the current system of “gradual intervention” – which obliges mayors to first try to scare a bear off, or capture and relocate it – and instead put the animal down directly if necessary.Existing methods “have so far proven ineffective”, Fechet said, adding: “I hope my proposal, which is currently under public consultation, will put an end to these tragedies. Human life comes first.”Slovakia this month also authorised a cull of 350 brown bears – about a quarter of its estimated population of 1,300 – after a 59-year-old man was mauled to death. Two other people died last year after being attacked or chased by bears.Slovaks “cannot live in a country where people are afraid to go into the forest, and where humans become food for bears”, said the country’s populist prime minister, Robert Fico.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.