Politics
State lawmakers targeted a Santa Barbara development. Then came the fallout
Outraged Santa Barbara residents jumped into action when a developer unveiled plans last year for a towering apartment complex within sight of the historic Old Mission.
They complained to city officials, wrote letters and formed a nonprofit to try and block the project. Still, the developer’s plans went forward.
Then something unusual happened.
Four hundred miles away in Sacramento, state lawmakers quietly tucked language into an obscure budget bill requiring an environmental impact study of the proposed development — which housing advocates allege was an attempt to block the project.
The legislation, Senate Bill 158, signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom, didn’t mention the Santa Barbara project by name. But the provision was so detailed and specific it couldn’t apply to any other development in the state.
The fallout was swift: The developer sued the state and a Santa Barbara lawmaker, the powerful new president of the state Senate, is under scrutiny over her role in the bill.
The current property located at the proposed location for the eight-story apartment tower.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
The saga highlights the governor’s and state Legislature’s growing influence in local housing decisions, and the battle between cities and Sacramento to address California’s critical housing shortage.
In the face of California’s high cost of housing and rent, state leaders are increasingly passing new housing mandates that require cities and counties to accelerate the construction of new housing and ease the barriers impeding developers.
In this case, the law targeting the Santa Barbara development does the opposite by making it harder to build.
‘A horrendous nightmare’
The fight started last year after developers Craig and Stephanie Smith laid out ambitious plans for an eight-story housing project with at least 250 apartments at 505 East Los Olivos St.
The five-acre site is near the Old Mission Santa Barbara, which draws hundreds of thousands of tourists each year.
In Santa Barbara, a slow-growth haven where many apartment buildings are two stories, the Los Olivos project was perceived as a skyscraper. The mayor, Randy Rowse, called the proposal “a horrendous nightmare,” according to local media site Noozhawk.
But the developer had an advantage. California law requires cities and counties to develop plans for growth every eight years to address California’s increasing population. Jurisdictions are required to pinpoint areas where housing or density could be added.
If cities and counties fail to develop plans by each eight-year deadline, a provision kicks in called “builder’s remedy.”
It allows developers to bypass local zoning restrictions and build bigger, denser projects as long as low or moderate-income units are included.
Santa Barbara was still working with the state on its housing plan when the deadline passed in February 2023. The plan was complete by December of that year, but didn’t become official until the state certified it in February 2024.
Opponents of the proposed Santa Barbara development, clockwise from bottom left: Cheri Rae, Brian Miller, Evan Minogue, Tom Meaney, Fred Sweeney and Steve Forsell.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
A month prior, in January, the developers submitted their plans. And since they included 54 low-income units, the city couldn’t outright deny the project.
“The developers were playing chess while the city was playing checkers,” said Evan Minogue, a Santa Barbara resident opposed to the development.
He said older generations in California resisted change, leaving the state to come in with “heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all policies to force cities to do something about housing.”
Santa Barbara, a wealthy city that attracts celebrities, bohemian artist-types and environmental activists, has a long history of fighting to keep its small-town feel.
In 1975, the City Council adopted a plan to limit development, along with water consumption and traffic, and keep a cap on the city’s population at 85,000. In the late ‘90s, actor Michael Douglas — an alum of UC Santa Barbara — donated money to preserve the city’s largest stretch of coastal land.
Hemmed in by the Santa Ynez Mountains, the city is dominated by low-slung buildings and single-family homes. The median home value is $1.8 million, according to Zillow. A city report last year detailed the need for 8,000 more units, primarily for low-income households, over the coming years.
Stephanie and Craig Smith, the developers of the project at 505 East Los Olivos Street.
(Ashley Gutierrez)
Assemblymember Gregg Hart, whose district includes Santa Barbara, supports the language in the budget bill requiring the environmental review. He doesn’t want to see the proposed development tower over the Old Mission and blames the builder’s remedy law for its introduction.
“It’s a brilliant illustration of how broken the ‘builder’s remedy’ system is,” said Hart. “Proposing projects like this undermines support for building density in Santa Barbara.”
Similar pushback has been seen in Santa Monica, Huntington Beach and other small cities as developers scramble to use the builder’s remedy law. A notable example recently played out in La Cañada Flintridge, where developers pushed through a mixed-use project with 80 units on a 1.29-acre lot despite fierce opposition from the city.
Still, the controversial law doesn’t exempt developments from review under the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA, the state’s landmark policy requiring a study of the project’s effects on traffic, air quality and more.
The developers behind the Los Olivos Street project sought to avoid the environmental review, however, because of a new state law that allows many urban infill projects to avoid such requirements. Assembly Bill 130, based on legislation introduced by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), was signed into law by Newsom in June.
When the Los Olivos developers asked city officials about using AB 130 for their project, a Santa Barbara community developer director told them in July 2025 that the CEQA review was necessary. AB 130 doesn’t apply if the project is planned near a creek and wetland habitat, or other environmentally sensitive area, the director wrote.
Months later, the state Legislature passed its budget bill requiring the review.
Santa Barbara residents who oppose the project said they didn’t ask for the bill.
But if the review finds that traffic from the development would overwhelm fire evacuation routes, for instance, they may have an easier time fighting the project.
“We don’t want to come off as NIMBYs,” resident Fred Sweeney, who opposes the project, said, referring to the phrase “not in my backyard.” Sweeney, an architect, and others started the nonprofit Smart Action for Growth and Equity to highlight the Los Olivos project and a second one planned by the same developer.
Standing near the project site on a recent day, Sweeney pointed as cars lined up along the main road. It wasn’t yet rush hour, but traffic was already building.
A ‘really strange’ bill
Buried deep in Senate Bill 158, the bill passed by state lawmakers targeting the Los Olivos project, is a mention of the state law around infill urban housing developments. Senate Bill 158 clarified that certain developments should not be exempt from this law.
Developments in “a city with more than 85,000 but fewer than 95,000 people, and within a county of between 440,00 and 455,000 people,” and which are also near a historical landmark, regulatory floodway and watershed, are not exempt, the bill stated.
According to the 2020 census, Santa Barbara has a population of 88,768. Santa Barbara County has a population of 448,229. And the project sits near both a creek and the Santa Barbara Mission.
The controversial development fit the bill.
Monique Limón is president pro tem of the California state Senate.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
A representative for Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón told CalMatters that the senator was involved in crafting that exemption language.
During a tour of an avocado farm in Ventura last month, Limón declined to comment on her role. She cited the lawsuit and directed questions to Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office.
Limón, who was born and raised in Santa Barbara, confirmed that she did talk to Sweeney — who started the nonprofit to fight the development — about opposition to the development.
The Los Olivos project had “a lot of community involvement and participation,” she said. “In terms of feedback, what I understand, reading the articles, there are over 400 people that have weighed in on it … it’s a very public project.”
Limón also defended her housing record.
“Every piece of legislation I author or review, I do so based on the needs of our state but also with the lens of the community I represent — whether that is housing, education, environmental protections or any other issues that come across my desk,” Limón said.
The developers filed a lawsuit against the city and state in October, claiming that SB 158 targets one specific project: theirs. As such, it would be illegal under federal law, which bans “special legislation” that targets a single person or property.
The home currently located at the proposed development site.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
The suit claims that Limón promoted and ushered the bill through the state Senate, argues that it should be overturned and questions the required environmental review, which would likely add years to its timeline and millions to its budget.
Stephanie Smith, one of the developers, told The Times that the bill was born of the “protests of wealthy homeowners, many of whom cosplay as housing advocates until the proposed housing is in their neighborhood.”
“As a former homeless student who worked full time and lived in my car, I know what it means to struggle to afford housing. Living without security or dignity gave me a foundational belief that housing is a nonnegotiable basic human right,” Smith said.
Public policy advocates and experts expressed concern about state lawmakers using their power to meddle with local housing projects, especially when carving out exemptions from laws they’ve imposed on everyone else in the state.
“It’s hard to ignore when legislation is drafted in a narrowly tailored way — especially when such language appears late in the process with little public input,” said Sean McMorris of good government group California Common Cause. “Bills developed in this manner risk fostering public cynicism about the legislative process and the motivations behind narrowly focused policymaking.”
UC Davis School of Law professor Chris Elmendorf, who specializes in housing policy, called the bill’s specific language “really strange” and questioned whether it would survive a legal challenge.
He expects to see more pleadings for exemptions from state housing laws.
“Local groups that don’t want the project are going to the legislature to get the relief that, in a previous era, they would have gotten from their city council,” Elmendorf said.
UC Santa Barbara student Enri Lala is the founder and president of a student housing group. He said the bill goes against a recent pro-housing movement in the area.
“It’s certainly out of the ordinary,” said Lala. “This is not the kind of move that we want to see repeated in the future.”
Politics
The Biggest Moments of Trump’s 2025: Mass Deportations, Tariffs and More
When Mr. Trump signed an executive order in March that promised to restore the Smithsonian Museum “to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness,” historians and other observers were anxious about what he meant.
Months later, the president confirmed their worst fears.
“The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been,” he wrote in a social media post in August.
The post, which came a week after the White House ordered a review of the museum’s exhibitions, offered the most candid look to date at what many of Mr. Trump’s executive actions on diversity have targeted: the history and experience of Black people in the United States.
High-profile Black leaders have been fired as the president builds an overwhelmingly white administration. Federal websites have been scrubbed to sanitize the country’s history of slavery and discrimination. And other government agencies, like the National Park Service, have also removed exhibits on slavery. At the same time, Mr. Trump has reinstalled statues that glorify Confederate soldiers.
In his first year, Mr. Trump has set out to rewrite the nation’s history by erasing the scars of its original sin.
Photographs by Al Drago, Doug Mills, Maansi Srivastava and Bettmann Archive, via Getty Images.
Politics
Nonprofit uses underwater technology to search for missing service members
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
More than 80,000 service members who went missing in action in previous conflicts are still unaccounted for. However, through research and new technology, the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency estimates the remains of 38,000 fallen veterans could be recoverable. Nonprofit organization Project Recover is working with the agency to bring some of those service members home through complex underwater missions.
“This is a great American story here,” former Navy Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet said. “Our work is to use technology, like underwater drones and scuba diving gear, to find the platforms that these members perished on and then do the DNA analysis of detecting and recovering their remains and matching them to those that are missing.”
Project Recover members stand with folded American flags during a ceremony honoring fallen World War II aviators. (Project Recover)
Gallaudet also serves as a Project Recover advisory council member. The group was founded by Dr. Patrick Scannon. He came up with the idea in 1993 when he was touring the Palau islands with his wife and discovered a downed plane from World War II.
“That 65-foot wing essentially changed my life,” Scannon said in an interview with GoPro.
NEWLY RELEASED AMELIA EARHART DOCUMENTS REVEAL VIVID DETAILS OF JAPAN’S ROLE IN SEARCH FOR DOOMED AVIATOR
Project Recover teams have located dozens of aircraft sites around the Palau islands associated with nearly 100 service members who went missing in action.
“The recovery is difficult. We first have to find the aircraft or ships,” Gallaudet said. “And then we’ve got to go determine if there are any remains there and then ID them, match them to the service members. “
In 1944, U.S. officials determined the Palau islands were a crucial part of a larger mission to liberate the Philippines. The effort to capture the island of Peleliu ended up being a costly effort for the U.S. Located around 500 miles away from the Philippines, the island held an airfield, which U.S. officials believed could be used to launch an attack during their larger mission. More than 10,000 Japanese troops were stationed on Peleliu at the time.
U.S. Air Force B-52 bombers are parked on a military airfield. (B-52 Bomber Down)
The battle was expected to last just a few days but ended up going on for 74. The U.S. began its bombardment by dropping more than 600 tons of bombs, but the Marines had little intelligence on enemy positions. Japanese troops hid in coral caves and mine shafts around the islands. The initial aerial attacks had little impact unless pilots flew dangerously close to the island.
SEARCH FOR MISSING MALAYSIA AIRLINES FLIGHT 370 TO RESUME AFTER MORE THAN A DECADE
On Peleliu, 1,800 Americans were killed in action and more than 8,000 were wounded or missing. Nearly all the 10,000 Japanese troops were killed in action. Across the Palau islands, the U.S. had carried out nine major air campaigns in which around 200 aircraft were lost.
Now Project Recover is working to bring some of those service members home.
“There were three service members on the aircraft that perished, a lieutenant and then two enlisted crew members. And over the last few years, we were able to recover the remains of all three. And we didn’t identify them all at the same time. It took forensic analysis and DNA. Technology. But the last one was finally identified,” Gallaudet said.
Lt. Jay Manown, AOM1c Anthony Di Petta and ARM1c Wilbur Mitts took off for a bombing mission in September 1944. They were conducting pre-invasion strikes in preparation for the invasion of Peleliu when their plane spun out of control and crashed into surrounding waters.
“The plane was hit by enemy fire, and it burst into flames,” Di Petta’s niece, Suzanne Nakamura, said in an interview with Media Evolve.
Project Recover located the plane in 2015. After more than a dozen dives to investigate the wreckage, teams began removing the remains of the three service members. Lt. Manown was the last to be repatriated.
“We held the ceremony in his hometown in West Virginia, and the relatives of all three service members came to that final ceremony,” Gallaudet said.
The three nieces of the men have become especially close.
A diver examines a wreck during an underwater mission to locate and recover missing U.S. service members. (Project Recover)
WWII HERO’S REMAINS FINALLY COMING HOME AFTER 80-YEAR MYSTERY IS SOLVED THROUGH MILITARY DEDICATION
“We’ve communicated beautifully and become friends through this experience and almost a sisterhood of type,” Manown’s niece, Rebecca Sheets, said in an interview with Media Evolve.
“We’ve talked so much by phone and feel so close,” Mitt’s niece, Diana Ward, told Media Evolve. “This is just a joy to meet each other in person, and we’re just sharing the emotion we’ve felt about bringing our uncles home.”
The three women have also connected over how their grandmothers, or the mothers of Manown, Di Petta and Mitts, may have felt about their sons finally coming home.
“We have a connection because our uncles were involved in not only defending the freedom of the United States, but as human beings who fought together and died together,” Nakamura said.
AMELIA EARHART MYSTERY EXPEDITION HALTED AS RESEARCHERS SEEK ANSWERS ON MISSING PLANE
Including their work in Palau, Project Recover has completed more than 100 missions across 25 countries. They have repatriated 24 missing Americans and have located more than 200 missing in action awaiting further recovery efforts. The group is raising money for a mission it hopes to complete in 2026 — the search for a B-52 aircraft that disappeared during a training accident.
“It’s off the coast of Texas. We’ve not yet found the aircraft. And of those eight service members, they all had families,” Gallaudet said. “There are about 32 of those family members still alive today who want the answers to know what happened to their loved ones.”
In addition to the more than 80,000 missing-in-action service members, 20,000 are missing from training accidents. The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency is not permitted to allocate funds toward a search effort for the eight men who disappeared along with their B-52 because the crash occurred during a non-conflict training accident.
“Not having found the wreck yet, we don’t know what the cause of the failure was. And so it’s our goal to find that wreckage and then take the remains and repatriate them to the families,” Gallaudet said.
U.S. Air Force B-52 crew members pose for a group photo. (B-52 Bomber Down)
The Air Force Bomber was on a routine training mission in February 1968 when it disappeared from radar and radio contact. The Air Force immediately conducted an extensive nine-day search of the flight path but found no trace of the bomber. As the military concluded its search, determining it went down in an unknown location, three pieces of debris washed ashore in Corpus Christi, Texas.
“This B-52 off the Texas coast hasn’t been located yet, but we think we know where the area is. We’re going to find it,” Gallaudet said.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
More than $300,000 has been raised for the mission so far. Project Recover estimates another $200,000 is needed to search for the eight men. If the organization can locate the remains, the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency will be able to allocate resources for a recovery effort.
You can learn more about Project Recover and the missing B-52 and donate to help with the search on Project Recover’s website.
Politics
Federal judge blocks ICE from arresting immigrants who show up for court appointments in Northern California
A federal judge in San Francisco on Wednesday barred Immigration and Customs Enforcement and its Justice Department counterpart from “sweeping” civil arrests at immigration courthouses across Northern California, teeing up an appellate challenge to one of the Trump administration’s most controversial deportation tactics.
“This circumstance presents noncitizens in removal proceedings with a Hobson’s choice between two irreparable harms,” Judge P. Casey Pitts wrote in his Christmas Eve decision.
“First, they may appear in immigration court and face likely arrest and detention,” the judge wrote. “Alternatively, noncitizens may choose not to appear and instead to forego their opportunity to pursue their claims for asylum or other relief from removal.”
Wednesday’s decision blocks ICE and the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review from lying in wait for asylum seekers and other noncitizens at routine hearings throughout the region — a move that would effectively restore pre-Trump prohibition on such arrests.
“Here, ICE and EOIR’s prior policies governing courthouse arrests and detention in holding facilities provide a standard,” the judge said.
Authorities have long curbed arrests at “sensitive locations”— such as hospitals, houses of worship and schools — putting them out of reach of most civil immigration enforcement.
The designation was first established decades ago under ICE’s predecessor agency, Immigration and Naturalization Services. ICE absorbed the prohibitions when the agency was formed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
Courts were added to the list under President Obama. The policy prohibiting most courthouse arrests was suspended during the first Trump administration and reinstated by President Biden.
Internal ICE guidance from the Biden era found “[e]xecuting civil immigration enforcement actions in or near a courthouse may chill individuals’ access to courthouses and, as a result, impair the fair administration of justice.”
Nevertheless, the agency’s courthouse policy was reversed again earlier this year, leading to a surge in arrests, and a staggering drop in court appearances, court records show.
Most who do not show up are ordered removed in absentia.
Monthly removal in absentia orders more than doubled this year, to 4,177 from fewer than 1,600 in 2024, justice department data show.
More than 50,000 asylum seekers have been ordered removed after failing to appear in court hearings since January — more than were ordered removed in absentia in the previous five years combined.
“ICE cannot choose to ignore the ‘costs’ of its new policies—chilling the participation of noncitizens in their removal proceedings —and consider only the policies’ purported ‘benefits’ for immigration enforcement,” Pitts wrote in his stay order.
That ruling likely sets the San Francisco case on a collision course with other lawsuits seeking to curb ICE’s incursions into spaces previously considered off-limits. This suit was brought by a group of asylum seekers who braved the risk and were detained when they showed up to court.
One, a 24-year-old Guatemalan asylum seeker named Yulisa Alvarado Ambrocio, was spared detention only because her breastfeeding 11-month-old was with her in court, records show. Administration lawyers told the court ICE would almost certainly pick her up at her next hearing.
Such arrests appear arbitrary and capricious, and are unlikely to survive scrutiny by the courts, Judge Pitts ruled Wednesday.
“That widespread civil arrests at immigration courts could have a chilling effect on noncitizens’ attendance at removal proceedings (as common sense, the prior guidance, and the actual experience in immigration court since May 2025 make clear) and thereby undermine this central purpose is thus ‘an important aspect of the problem’ that ICE was required, but failed, to consider,” Pitts wrote.
A district judge in Manhattan ruled the opposite way on a similar case this fall, setting up a possible circuit split and even a Supreme Court challenge to courthouse arrests in 2026.
For now, the Christmas Eve decision only applies to ICE’s San Francisco Area of Responsibility, a region encompassing all of Northern and Central California, as far south as Bakersfield.
The geographic limit comes in response to the Supreme Court’s emergency decision earlier this year stripping district judges of the power to block federal policies outside narrowly-tailored circumstances.
The administration told the court it intends to appeal to the 9th Circuit, where Trump-appointed judges have swung the bench far to the right of its longtime liberal reputation.
-
Maine1 week agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMIT professor Nuno F.G. Loureiro, a 47-year-old physicist and fusion scientist, shot and killed in his home in Brookline, Mass. | Fortune
-
New Mexico1 week agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz and See How Much You Know About Jane Austen
-
World6 days agoPutin says Russia won’t launch new attacks on other countries ‘if you treat us with respect’
-
Maine1 week agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off
-
Minneapolis, MN1 week agoMinneapolis man is third convicted in Coon Rapids triple murder
-
Culture1 week agoRevisiting Jane Austen’s Cultural Impact for Her 250th Birthday