Following a public hearing, the City Council on March 23 voted unanimously to bring back proposed code amendments at a future date.
Several council members expressed a desire to further discuss the proposed changes.
The proposed changes are required to comply with state law.
Technically, this was an introduction of the zoning amendments.
The changes to the code included farmworker housing, the density bonus, and reduced parking standards for studios and one-bedroom apartments.
The Planning Commission considered the proposed zoning amendments on Feb. 2, 2026. However, the four commissioners who were present that night could not make a recommendation because both of their votes tied. (See “Planners: No recommendation on code update” at sunnews.org.) The Planning Commission only advises the council on code changes.
The following is not a transcript but highlights from the meeting.
Staff recommended the council approve the amendments.
Public comments
Ken Seiff, of College Park West, asked about the farmworkers housing issue and housing on the Naval Weapons Station.
Community Development Director Shaun Temple said the amendments were not development plans, they were updates to the code. “There’s not a lot of farm activity in the city, as I stated earlier, this is a state of California one-size-fits-all request,” Temple said.
“Essentially, everything being proposed to the council tonight is already state law and the state is asking us to bring our code into alignment with their code,” Temple said.
Teresa Miller, of Old Town, said she went through the programs listed in the amendments. She said most of the money for the programs was coming from the General Fund. “Where is that money going to come from and is there an estimate?” Miller asked.
She said the council by approving the zoning last year “locked us up”.
“It’s basically selling out to any developer who wants to do just about anything they want as long as they meet the criteria,” Miller said.
“I’m sick and tired of hearing, ‘Oh, the state says,’” Miller said.
“People need to think before they vote,” said Ellery Deaton, of Old Town.
“This is absolutely what we get for what we’ve got in Sacramento. It’s time for a change,” Deaton said.
“You keep getting threatened with builders remedies. Look at what you’ve done in Old Town. It’s builders remedy. It’s an empty threat. You’re giving it away instead of having a builder come in and take it,” Deaton said.
“You’re in a tough place, I know it. I didn’t vote in a way that got us here, but the state of California did.”
The mayor then closed the public hearing.
Council comments
“Yes, we’re in a tough spot,” said District One Council Member Joe Kalmick.
According to Kalmick, other cities that have fought the state have lost every court case.
“It will cost them a lot of money to come into compliance before there’s an opportunity for review,” he said.
According to Kalmick, the city will be required to provide monthly, quarterly, and annual reports on the programs listed in the code amendments.
“This is going to take staff time. It’s another unfunded mandate,” Kalmick said.
According to Kalmick, if you look at development in the city, things have not changed substantially.
He said Old Town can’t get much more dense within the 25-foot height limit. Kalmick speculated that Seal Beach might be forced to build up, apparently a reference to the city’s height limit.
“So far, that doesn’t seem to be imminent,” Kalmick said. He said the city had to be watchful of the next Regional Housing Needs Assessment. (As previously reported, the state required Seal Beach to plan for the construction 1,243 units in the most recent RHNA. Legally, the state can’t force property owners to actually build any of those units.)
He said anything over one unit would be impossible. He described the effort to plan for 1,243 units was “the dance of the seven veils”.
According to Kalmick, Seal Beach as a community needed keep its eyes open for what may be coming.
“We can act accordingly without blatantly trying to push back on the state,” Kalmick said.
District Four Councilwoman Patty Senecal expressed concerns about the unknowns in the proposed zoning amendments. “We have no idea what we’re walking into,” she said, referring to the impact on the city’s budget.
“We need to look at the financial obligations of an unfunded mandate that will be put upon this city,” Senecal said.
She said each time she read the information, it was more confusing that the first time she read it.
Senecal called for a study session on the proposed zoning amendments. “We need to let people know about this, walk through it with them,” Senecal said.
“I’m deeply concerned about the budget implications,” Senecal said.
City Attorney Nick Ghirelli said costs of the programs in the zoning amendments had been absorbed.
“It’s not being proposed that we adopt all these programs tonight,” said Community Development Director Shaun Temple.
He agreed with Senecal that a study session on the code changes would be beneficial. “It’s like taking an entire three or four year program in college and trying to read it over the weekend,” Temple said. “It’s just too much information.”
District Five Councilman Nathan Steele said the council did not have enough information to even fathom what this was all about. “I have little to no trust in Sacramento and their policies and the way they’re pointing in this world,” Steele said.
“We don’t know what Seal Beach is going to look like in 25 years,” Steele said.
“I don’t want to give them an inch,” Steele said.
District Three Councilwoman/Mayor Lisa Landau asked, “Why do we even need a City Council?”
Landau said once the council votes for high density in Old Town, the character of Old Town would be “destroyed” forever. “There’s no going back on that,” Landau said.
“I also think we need to bring this back,” Landau said.
Senecal moved to bring the item back at a later date. “I think we need more information,” Senecal.
Background
The City Council adopted the Housing Element of the Seal Beach General Plan for 2021-2029. The council also adopted related amendments to the Zoning Coe and the Main Street Specific plan, according to the staff report by Shaun Temple, director of Community Development.
“The adopted Housing Element contains a list of State-mandated Programs that are required to be implemented to ensure the City meets the State objectives,” Temple wrote
According to Temple, those objectives include facilitating housing for every economic level in the state and furthering fair housing.
A Feb. 26 letter from the California Department of Housing and Community Development said Seal Beach had to implement the programs to remain in compliance with the Seal Beach Housing Element, according to Temple’s report.
Those programs included: Farmworker housing, a residential density bonus for developments that include affordable housing, a commercial density bonus for a commercial developments with affordable housing with 30% of the units for low income residents, replace the 950 and 1,200 square foot minimums with a 500 square foot standard for residential zones, and reduced parking requirements.
