Loading
Loading
Goleta, California · SB 330 Preliminary Application 2025
Goleta told Shelby Family Partnership, L.P. that SB 330 did not apply to an amendment of a previously approved project. On February 26, 2025, Judge Thomas P. Anderle of the Santa Barbara Superior Court disagreed — and ordered the city to process the revised Glen Annie project under Builder's Remedy.
The City Council authorized a settlement on June 23, 2025. The project will include 11 of 56 units as affordable housing — 19.6%, above the state minimum. Attorney General Bonta issued a statewide Builder's Remedy legal alert shortly after.
Location
Glen Annie Site
Goleta, CA
Project
56 Units / 11 Affordable
Shelby Family Partnership, L.P.
Ruling
Feb 26, 2025
Judge Thomas P. Anderle
Settlement
June 23, 2025
Goleta City Council
Goleta · 2023–2025
Shelby submitted an SB 330 preliminary application to revise a previously approved project. Goleta refused to process it. The court found the refusal unlawful.
2023
Shelby submits SB 330 preliminary application
Shelby Family Partnership, L.P. submits a preliminary application under Senate Bill 330 to update a previously approved plan for the Glen Annie site. Because Goleta lacks a state-certified housing element, the revised project qualifies for Builder's Remedy treatment.
2023–2024
Goleta rejects the application
The city refuses to process the filing, asserting that SB 330 applies only to new projects and not to amendments of previously approved applications. Shelby files in Santa Barbara Superior Court.
February 26, 2025
Court rules Goleta must process the application
Judge Thomas P. Anderle writes that Shelby 'has provided all of the information and payment required by former section 65941.1, subdivision (a), so that under the plain meaning of the statute the applicant … shall be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application.' The court orders Goleta to accept the SB 330 preliminary application and process the Revised Project per state law, including the Builder's Remedy provisions.
March 2025
Attorney General Bonta issues Builder's Remedy alert
The California Attorney General issues a statewide legal alert reminding local governments of their obligations under the Housing Accountability Act. The Goleta ruling is frequently cited.
June 23, 2025
Goleta City Council authorizes settlement
The Goleta City Council authorizes a settlement with Shelby Family Partnership. The project moves forward under Builder's Remedy, with 11 of 56 units designated as affordable housing — 19.6%, above the state minimum.
Late 2025
Ruling cited statewide in similar disputes
The Santa Barbara ruling becomes persuasive authority for other California projects where cities have attempted to narrow SB 330's scope to exclude amended or successor applications.
The Legal Question
Goleta's theory was that SB 330's preliminary-application protections — which freeze development standards at time of filing — applied only to newly proposed projects. The court read the statute plainly.
Goleta's Theory
The city argued that SB 330's preliminary-application mechanism was designed for new projects. An amendment or revision of a previously approved development — according to Goleta — sat outside the statute's scope and therefore could be refused processing. That reading would have let cities freeze out repositioned projects at will.
Judge Anderle's Ruling
The court held the statute's plain meaning controls. Once the applicant provides the required information and payment under former Gov. Code § 65941.1(a), they are deemed to have submitted a preliminary application. Because Goleta lacked a state-certified housing element, the revised project qualified for Builder's Remedy processing.
The Settlement Terms
The June 23, 2025 settlement authorized by the City Council commits Goleta to accepting and processing the project application and its associated environmental documents. Under the settlement, 11 of 56 units — 19.6% — are designated as affordable housing, above the state minimum. The practical effect is a higher affordability set-aside than Shelby was originally required to commit to, in exchange for ending the litigation.
RealClear Analysis
Cities that argue the statute says less than it does keep losing. Goleta is the most recent example, and the $500K-plus legal bill is a proxy for the broader cost of this strategy.
Site Analysis
Glen Annie Site
Goleta, CA · 56-unit revised project
STRONG — settlement in hand
Pathway
SB 330 + Builder's Remedy
Former § 65941.1(a)
Affordability
11 of 56 units
19.6% (above state min.)
Applicable Lesson
For revisions to previously approved projects in non-certified jurisdictions: SB 330 freeze still applies. File, document, and hold the line.
The RealClear Assessment
Score: 80/100. The Goleta ruling closes a narrow interpretive gap that cities have tried to exploit. SB 330 preliminary applications apply to revisions, not just new filings. Attorney General Bonta's subsequent legal alert reinforces the posture statewide.
For existing entitled-but-unbuilt projects in non-certified jurisdictions, the practical effect is that repositioning is not punished. Redesign, refile, and the SB 330 clock runs from the new application.
Key insight: Dormant entitlements are not abandoned entitlements. SB 330 preliminary applications can re-activate them under Builder's Remedy math.
RealClear
RealClear identifies which California projects qualify for SB 330 preliminary-application protection on a revised basis — and which jurisdictions' housing-element status makes Builder's Remedy available.
This case file is based on publicly available information about Shelby Family Partnership, L.P. v. City of Goleta, decided by the Santa Barbara Superior Court on February 26, 2025, and the subsequent June 23, 2025 settlement agreement. RealClear analysis is generated from cited records and may contain errors. This is not legal advice. Verify all information independently before making investment decisions.
Keep reading