The latest “not in my backyard” tactic in California’s local zoning disputes and housing law battle?
File a complaint with the State Bar Association.
Case in point: An attorney who failed to derail a zoning ordinance for Rancho Palos Verdes, California, filed a complaint with the California State Bar over a March 2025 YIMBY Law letter addressed to the City Council that suggested the city should follow state housing mandates.
The state bank, in turn, launched an investigation into the pro-housing group YIMBY Law for unauthorized practice of law. Attorneys from the Institute for Justice, representing YIMBY Law, claim the study violates the First Amendment
The dispute could become a litmus test for the lengths to which opponents of the upgrade will go to push back against state housing enforcement. Tensions have increased between Sacramento housing regulators and opponents who oppose the state’s density expansion mandates passed at the urging of “yes in my backyard” supporters.
These tensions mirror battles in other cities where pro-NIMBY residents have turned to courts and professional regulators to slow or punish efforts to increase the density of single-family neighborhoods at any level.
In Charlottesville, Virginia, for example, homeowners have sued over a 2023 zoning overhaul that opened single-family neighborhoods to “missing median housing,” citing procedural errors. The city settled instead of going to trial after a judge briefly declared the zoning ordinance void. It was agreed to carry out new traffic and infrastructure studies while maintaining the additional density
The complaint against YIMBY Law is an unusual situation because Sonja Trauss, the executive director, is not a trained attorney. The group advocates changing laws to build more housing
YIMBY Law routinely writes letters to local agencies to encourage compliance with statewide housing laws such as the Housing Accountability Act.
“You shouldn’t have to be a lawyer to tell the government what you think,” Trauss said. “This goes beyond having a disagreement about policy – this is trying to end the discussion completely.”
Challenge more than 16 houses
Last year, Rancho Palos Verdes, an affluent city in Los Angeles County, considered removing three locations from its “Housing Elements Plan,” which was updated in 2024.
Developer Ali Vahdani had an application for a site that would be scaled up from four homes per hectare to 22 units per hectare in 2024. Vahdani had purchased the lot from Thomas and Shannon Hartman, who still live in the area. He wants to build fourteen town houses and two outbuildings
Vahdani’s plans were met with opposition from neighbors, including the Hartmans. The neighbors argued that the density would harm the single-family neighborhood and pose a risk to a nearby 250,000-year-old landslide.
As the city prepared to decide, said Vahdani, a civil engineer and founder of Optimal seismic, told The real deal he felt devastated. This project would be his first land development
“I thought it was totally unfair, totally insane,” he said. “I couldn’t believe they would downzone it months later.”
His lawyer stepped up the fight. Trauss followed with a detailed letter to the City Council saying removing the sites would violate state law and Vahdani’s established rights.
The city’s housing element plan amendment had already been sent to the California Coastal Commission, marking final approval in the process.
Reopening the lawsuit could “subject the city to numerous avenues for litigation and scrutiny,” Trauss wrote in her letter.
In 2019, the state passed the Housing Crisis Act that limited downzoning and procedural barriers to protect and expand California’s housing capacity statewide. The state has further tightened the rules for cities in 2021. The municipal council has chosen not to implement the changes. That wasn’t the end of the battle
Neighbors submit a dispute over zoning plans to the Coastal Commission
After the municipality retained the locations in the housing plan, opponents entered into battle with the state. Newport Beach attorney Kendra Carney Mehr represented the Hartmans for the commission hearing in August. Mehr sent an email from the opposition, joining others in highlighting environmental and geological concerns regarding the site
She argued that the amendment to the city’s housing elements “created zoning and inconsistent development. Mehr cited the Local Coastal Plan, which coastal cities are required to have by law, which states: “All new developments will be residential single-family homes. Subdivisions of large parcels of land should be designed in a manner consistent with the existing community pattern.”
The committee approved the city’s amendment despite opposition. After the committee supported the city, Mehr went one step further. She filed a complaint against YIMBY Law. Meher did not respond to questions about motivation
The Institute for Justice lawyers were surprised that the Bar Association had not dismissed the complaint, as has been the case with many. It is unclear what the punishment would be because Trauss is not a member of the bar. The Institute said it would file a lawsuit if the bar association took disciplinary action.
“There is nothing more American than the right to tell government officials that you think they are breaking the law,” senior attorney Sam Gedge said in a statement. “All you need before writing to government officials is an opinion – not a license from the state.”
