City of Patterson Can’t Use Water as a Pretext to Block Housing

Patterson, the city of 23,000 in California’s Central Valley, may be the Apricot Capital of the World, but it’s unlikely it will ever be called the Housing Capital of the World. While the city government is embracing distribution facilities for Amazon, it is dragging its feet on its legal obligations to approve more housing, resulting in years of delay and millions in wasted dollars.

But thanks in part to YIMBY Law, 719 new homes could be finally coming to the city.

Read More

Santa Cruz County’s “Retroactive Certification” Stunt is a Waste of Time and an Insult to Housing Law

In March, Santa Cruz County asked the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) to ignore California statute, case law, and go back in time two years to change its own decision on the off chance that it will kill two housing projects, one of which the Board already approved. This absurd dysfunction is everything wrong with Californian governance. Instead of building housing, something the County was already legally obligated to do and had agreed to do in its Housing Element, the Board of Supervisors is wasting staff time on a long shot to stop two projects that have been in process for years.

Read More

Can Cities Run Out the Clock on the Builder’s Remedy? A court in Santa Clara says no way.

A Santa Clara Superior Court judge ruled that Los Gatos improperly tried to block two developers from building new housing in the Silicon Valley city of 30,000. Thanks in part to an amicus brief by YIMBY Law, the court ruled in Town of Los Gatos v. Arya Property, LLC, et al. that the law in California allows developers to make multiple attempts to fix incomplete applications.

Read More

YIMBY Law fights for Free Speech, and we win

At the very end of 2025, the day after Christmas, we got a strange email. Apparently, an attorney representing NIMBYs in Rancho Palos Verdes had reported YIMBY Law to the CA State Bar, complaining that we are engaging in the practice of law without a license. Their evidence is the letter we sent to RPV telling them they had to implement their housing element. We send hundreds of letters like this, all over California. For the past decade, it has been core to our strategy of enforcing state law. Here's coverage from Housing Wire, the SF Chronicle and our own substack blog, In Practice

Besides the danger to our ability to successfully advance our mission, this is a direct threat to anyone seeking government accountability. If the CA Bar succeeded here, it wouldn't stop with us - it could embolden cities and bad-faith actors everywhere to intimidate advocates into backing off.

So instead of pausing our enforcement while the investigation played out, we decided to fight this on First Amendment grounds and to continue our enforcement work. We teamed up with the Institute for Justice. We demanded the CA State Bar close the investigation, or else face a federal lawsuit. 

On Friday Feb 6, 2026 we received word that the CA State Bar responded to our pressure, ending the investigation and finding that "there is no evidence Sonja Trauss or YIMBY Law is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law." You can read their letter here.

Newport Beach's NIMBYs Are Trying To Rewrite the Law to Block New Houses

Newport Beach is one of the richest cities in California. If you lived there, you'd assume you wouldn't have any reason to throw a tantrum. But then again, for some NIMBYs, there's no excuse too small to try to block housing. An initiative slated for the November 2026 ballot would toss out a zoning plan that tooks years for the city’s staff to write and is already approved by the state for one cobbled together by local NIMBYs that would allow a fraction of the housing the city needs to be built. 

Read More

People v. Camp signals hope for Colorado housing reforms

A case about criminal sentencing may be the key to enforcing statewide zoning reforms.

Late December, Colorado housing advocates won a victory in an unexpected place: a criminal court decision by the state supreme court. Following the logic of that decision, state courts should find that housing reforms are not only good policy; they are supported by well-established legal principles.

Read More