This story was published in collaboration with KVPR, The Merced Focus and The Modesto Focus.
San Joaquin Valley cities and counties are scrambling to revise state-mandated housing plans after California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced earlier this week his plans to sue over a dozen Valley jurisdictions that are out of compliance with state housing law.
Of the 15 jurisdictions that received violation notices from the state, all but two are located within the eight-county region that makes up the San Joaquin Valley, which stretches from around Bakersfield to Stockton. The agricultural heartland of California is home to 4.3 million people and considered one of the fastest-growing areas in the state – in part because housing prices are more affordable here than in the state’s coastal cities.
Newsom announced plans to sue Atwater, Avenal, California City, Corcoran, Escalon, Half Moon Bay, Hanford, Kings County, Lemoore, Merced County, Montclair, Oakdale, Patterson, Ridgecrest and Turlock. Half Moon Bay is a city in the San Francisco-Bay Area, and Montclair is in San Bernardino County.
The jurisdictions each have 30 days to bring plans, called “Housing Elements,” into compliance with state law. Every eight years, over 500 jurisdictions statewide must submit plans to California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) outlining how jurisdictions will meet housing demand at all income levels – including programs for unhoused populations. A thorough analysis should quantify these needs and provide a detailed explanation of the specific challenges, as well as the resources available to meet them.
While the governor’s message implied the counties and cities were dragging their feet to complete and update their housing elements, Valley jurisdictions painted another picture, saying they’ve been working tirelessly with HCD to amend and update housing elements so they’re in compliance.
A lawsuit from the state could jeopardize key state funding for the local jurisdictions. It’s unclear exactly how much funding is at stake for each jurisdiction.
“I’m disappointed on behalf of the state and the people of California that after years of effort, we still have communities that aren’t meeting the needs of their residents,” Newsom said. “No community gets a pass when it comes to addressing homelessness or creating more housing access.”
Every Californian deserves a place to live properly, Newsom said.
This latest round of lawsuits is part of Newsom’s broader approach to tackle the Golden State’s affordable housing and homelessness crisis, a hallmark of the governor’s tenure.
“Every community needs to address homelessness and create new, affordable housing — period, full stop,” Newsom later posted on the social media platform X.
North Valley
In the northern San Joaquin Valley, state officials are targeting the city of Escalon in San Joaquin County and the cities of Oakdale, Patterson and Turlock in Stanislaus County.
Turlock officials said in a news release that they submitted the housing element plan last year and received comments from the HCD. Just days before receiving the state notice of violation, officials with HCD emailed Turlock city officials saying they had no feedback on the city’s housing element.
According to the city officials, they are working to resolve the issues along with six of 10 Stanislaus County jurisdictions to align with state law, but the process is taking longer than anticipated.
Turlock has worked diligently to understand how to comply with state demands, Mayor Amy Bublak told The Modesto Focus. Her staff has waited long periods for the state’s answers to Turlock’s questions, she said.
“I would love for this to be off our checklist,” said Bublak, who crossed swords with Newsom last year over homeless shelter funding.
He publicly scolded Turlock leaders, and she responded with an opinion column criticizing his indignation.
“I can’t help but feel this is a bit of (fallout from) the issue that made us a topic of his disgust,” Bublak said. “I’m just fighting for what I believe a majority of the community wants, and it’s sometimes not what he wants.”
In Patterson, city officials said in a statement they have been in contact with HCD to finalize and adopt its housing element, along with rezoning efforts and certification of an associated environmental impact report. City officials also noted they’re working to come into compliance with state groundwater regulations in a critically overdrafted groundwater basin.
“The City of Patterson takes its responsibilities under state housing law seriously…,” the city’s statement reads. “We remain committed to aligning with state standards and will continue working collaboratively with HCD to support responsible, community-focused growth.”
Additionally, the state plans to sue Merced County and the city of Atwater, which is located in Merced County.
A spokesperson for Merced County said in a statement officials are actively working toward final adoption of the county’s housing element – and have made significant progress – and will continue to do so until the county reaches compliance.
“This reflects both momentum and our continued commitment to meeting all requirements in a thorough and responsible manner,” the statement read. “Our goal remains clear: to plan for suitable housing development opportunities that support the needs of our growing community.”
Merced County Supervisor Scott Silveira said he believes communication between county and HCD officials needs clarification.
“Ultimately, it’s our responsibility,” Silveira said about bringing the county’s housing element up to state compliance. He added that he learned of Newsom’s announcement along with the rest of the public.
The environmental justice organization Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability for years has notified Merced County that it may be out of compliance with state housing law, according to letters the organization sent county officials dating back to 2024.
“The draft’s deficiencies include a failure to adequately solicit public input, analyze disproportionate housing needs of classes protected by civil rights statutes, including displacement risk, and adopt programs that will result in a beneficial impact in the planning period,” the organization wrote to Merced County officials in June 2024.
In Atwater, District 2 Councilmember Kalisa Rochester, said she, along with the city manager, Chris Hoem, learned about Newsom’s announcement through a local evening news broadcast on Wednesday.
“It’s very concerning, right? When you hear news like this…it’s shocking to hear,” she said. “Oh my gosh, the state is gonna sue us?’”
Rochester said the news was disappointing, but she’s confident the city will come into compliance shortly. She noted the city is on the verge of announcing a seven-day public review for its housing element and has recently been in touch with HCD staff.
“We emailed one of their directors a key question a few days ago,” Rochester said. “They responded, and then gave us a notice of violation, despite knowing we are making good progress at the moment.”
South Valley
In the southern San Joaquin Valley, the state is considering legal action against multiple jurisdictions in Tulare, Kings and Kern Counties – including Kings County itself.
The city of Corcoran in Tulare County, along with the Kings County cities of Avenal, Hanford and Lemoore are on Newsom’s list. So are the desert cities of Ridgecrest and California City in Kern County.
Officials with Kings County said they will incorporate any necessary revisions and plans to send to HCD by Friday, March 27.
“Avenal, along with Kings County and neighboring jurisdictions, participated in a multi-jurisdictional housing element effort. While the intent was regional coordination, it recently became clear that the process required course correction to keep timelines on track,” officials with the city of Avenal said in a news release.
Housing remains a priority in the city, officials said, and officials are currently working on fulfilling all outstanding requirements to ensure alignment with state and federal partners, thereby ensuring that communities can grow, according to the news release.
Hanford officials said they are also working with Kings County to update the housing element, which will be submitted to the state this week.
Lemoore city officials recently opted to withdraw from Kings County’s multi-jurisdictional housing element in an effort to reach compliance expeditiously, officials said in a news release. Officials plan to submit the city’s latest updated plan, which officials said they hope will be the final one.
“The city is committed to achieving compliance and continuing to support housing in Lemoore,” the release said
California City officials also released a statement that included a timeline with key dates for their housing element, noting that HCD officials issued a letter to the city in October 2025 noting the housing element was substantially compliant. The city’s housing element is scheduled to go before the planning commission in April and before the city council for final adoption in May.
“California City is uniquely positioned for residential growth, given that it is California’s third-largest city in geography and an incredible place to live,” California City officials said in a statement.
Other Valley cities faced past scrutiny
The latest 15 jurisdictions are not the first Valley government agencies to face criticism over their housing policies.
Last year, the state revoked Fresno’s prohousing designation, stripping the San Joaquin Valley’s largest city’s ability to apply for millions of state housing dollars.
Housing and homelessness advocate Dez Martinez settled her lawsuit against the city of Clovis that claimed the city’s zoning discriminated against low-income residents and people of color. The settlement agreement included plans for Clovis to increase its affordable housing stock.
Years ago, Fresno County also faced a similar lawsuit from a group of residents claiming its general plan and housing element was discriminatory.
