Case File · Santa Monica, California
16 Applications. 4,562 Units. Two Weeks.
Santa Monica’s Housing Element went non-compliant in February 2022. Over the next eight months developers sharpened their pencils. In the final two weeks before HCD recertification on Oct 14, 2022, sixteen Builder’s Remedy applications hit the counter. WS Communities, led by Neil Shekhter, filed twelve of them. The largest proposal: a 15-story, 2,000-unit tower.
RealClear would have scored this filing window 72/100 and flagged the settlement endgame before the first application was drafted.
16
Applications
4,562
Units Proposed
>800
Affordable Component
2,000 / 15
Largest Project
12 of 16
WS Communities Filings
Oct 14 2022
HCD Cert Date
Santa Monica, California
The window closes.
Oct 14, 2021
Initial Housing Element submitted
Santa Monica submits its 6th Cycle Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The submission is the statutory mechanism by which California jurisdictions demonstrate they have planned for their share of regional housing need.
Feb 8, 2022
HCD rejects the Housing Element as non-compliant
HCD finds Santa Monica's Housing Element substantively out of compliance with state law. Under Cal. Gov. Code §65589.5, non-compliance strips the city of discretionary denial authority over housing projects meeting affordability thresholds — the Builder's Remedy window opens by operation of law.
Oct 14–31, 2022
16 Builder's Remedy applications filed in two weeks
Over the final two weeks before HCD recertification, developers file sixteen Builder's Remedy applications totaling 4,562 units with an affordable component exceeding 800 units. WS Communities, led by Neil Shekhter, files twelve of the sixteen. The largest project proposed is a 15-story, 2,000-unit tower.
Oct 14, 2022
HCD certifies Santa Monica's compliant Housing Element — too late for filed applications
HCD certifies Santa Monica's revised Housing Element as compliant the same day the filing window closes. Applications already filed are vested under §65589.5; the recertification does not claw them back. The door shuts behind the sixteen.
Dec 2022
City processes first formal Builder's Remedy application
Santa Monica's Planning Department begins formal intake on the filed applications. City staff acknowledges the statutory posture even as Mayor Gleam Davis and City Council publicly explore challenges.
May 2023
Santa Monica reaches settlement with WS Communities
After months of negotiation led by City Manager David White and Planning Director Jing Yeo, the city and WS Communities reach a settlement. Most WS projects are withdrawn in exchange for density-bonus resubmittal rights — a template structure that would be copied in other California jurisdictions.
Apr 2024
Two Builder's Remedy projects still moving through permits
Two of the original sixteen applications — outside the WS settlement framework — continue through permitting. The filing-to-negotiation template is now the dominant outcome pattern for California Builder's Remedy activity statewide.
The Same Window, Scored at Two Moments
Filing leverage alone is fragile. The settlement is the story.
Oct 14, 2022 — Filing Deadline
Housing Element non-compliant since Feb 2022. Developers raced to file the day before recertification. Legal framework strong but political firestorm imminent.
Apr 2024 — Settlement + Two Projects Proceeding
Most WS projects withdrawn and resubmitted under density bonus. Two BR projects still moving through permits. Settlement structure established template for post-filing negotiation. Durable but marginal.
The Legal Mechanism
Housing Accountability Act
Cal. Gov. Code §65589.5(d) strips local discretionary denial authority when a jurisdiction is out of Housing Element compliance. Builder's Remedy projects with 20% lower-income or 100% moderate-income affordability can proceed without regard to local zoning. Applications filed during non-compliance are vested even after the Housing Element is later certified.
The Filing Window
Eight Months
HCD found Santa Monica non-compliant on Feb 8, 2022. HCD certified the revised Housing Element on Oct 14, 2022. That eight-month gap was the filing window. Most applications in Santa Monica were filed in the final two weeks — a pattern that repeats across California: developers wait for the window to be confirmed and file just before it closes.
The Applicant Concentration
WS Communities: 12 of 16
Neil Shekhter's WS Communities filed twelve of the sixteen Santa Monica Builder's Remedy applications. This concentration shaped the political reaction and the settlement: the city could negotiate with a single counterparty for the bulk of the exposure, which accelerated the May 2023 deal. Filing concentration is a leading indicator of settlement feasibility.
The Settlement Template
Density-Bonus Resubmittal
The May 2023 Santa Monica-WS deal traded Builder's Remedy applications for density-bonus resubmittal rights under California state density bonus law. Most projects were withdrawn in their as-filed form and resubmitted at densities supported by density bonus plus local concessions. This is now the dominant California Builder's Remedy outcome pattern — the filing creates leverage, the negotiation defines what gets built.
Key Decision Makers & Stakeholders
The people who decided this window’s fate.
Gustavo Velasquez
HCD Director
California Department of Housing and Community Development
Documented Record
Certified Santa Monica's Housing Element on Oct 14, 2022 — the deadline developers raced to beat. HCD's technical finding of non-compliance on Feb 8, 2022 enabled the Builder's Remedy window; the Oct 14 certification closed it.
Velasquez's HCD is the state-level enforcement engine behind Builder's Remedy. HCD's non-compliance determinations are not opinions — they are the statutory trigger that strips local denial authority. Tracking HCD's quarterly compliance list is the single most important intelligence input for California housing developers.
Mayor Gleam Davis / City Council
Municipal Governing Body
Santa Monica, California
Documented Record
Explored litigation, briefly argued applications were invalid, then shifted to negotiation. City Manager David White and Planning Director Jing Yeo led the settlement talks with WS Communities that concluded in May 2023.
The Council's posture followed the standard California Builder's Remedy reaction arc: public outrage, litigation threat, then pragmatic settlement. The pivot to negotiation under White and Yeo was the critical move — cities that litigate to exhaustion end up with more built density than cities that negotiate density-bonus resubmittals.
Neil Shekhter
CEO, WS Communities
Santa Monica, California
Documented Record
Filed 12 of 16 Builder's Remedy applications. Settled in May 2023 withdrawing most projects in exchange for density-bonus resubmittal rights. One project at 1433 Euclid remained outside the settlement framework.
Shekhter's concentration strategy — twelve filings from one developer — created the political pressure and the negotiation counterparty the city needed. The May 2023 settlement structure he accepted became the template for post-filing negotiation across California. This is the playbook: file to establish position, negotiate for durable density-bonus rights.
David White
City Manager
Santa Monica, California
Documented Record
Led settlement negotiations with WS Communities from late 2022 through May 2023. Managed the political tension between Council's public opposition posture and the legal reality that the applications were vested.
White's role is the standard pattern for municipal-side Builder's Remedy resolution: the elected officials posture publicly while the professional staff negotiate privately. The staff-led negotiation path is what converts a filing-leverage position into a buildable settlement.
Jing Yeo
Planning Director
Santa Monica, California
Documented Record
Directed Planning Department intake and review of the sixteen Builder's Remedy applications starting December 2022. Co-led settlement discussions with WS Communities alongside the City Manager's office.
Yeo's Planning Department carried the technical weight of the review and the density-bonus resubmittal framework. The settlement's specific density and affordability terms reflect Planning Department staff judgment about what the city could accept without further state intervention.
YIMBY Law / California YIMBY
Housing Advocacy and Legal Enforcement
California (statewide)
Documented Record
Provided statewide legal support for Builder's Remedy applicants through 2022–2024. The Santa Monica filings influenced the subsequent Chalfant ruling in Redondo Beach (Feb 2024) establishing statewide Builder's Remedy precedent.
The Santa Monica filing wave is part of the broader YIMBY enforcement ecosystem. The political and legal energy that converted §65589.5 from dormant statute to active filing strategy came from organized advocacy across the state, not any single developer. This is a coalition outcome, not a solo win.
“What if you knew — the day HCD issued its non-compliance finding — exactly how long the filing window would stay open?”
The Pre-Filing Intelligence
What RealClear finds in Santa Monica.
Before a single application is drafted. Before HCD recertifies. Before the Council realizes what hit the counter.
Jurisdiction Analysis
Santa Monica, California
Builder’s Remedy window — Feb 8 to Oct 14, 2022
Statutory Basis
HCD Non-Compliance
Political Reaction Risk
Settlement Probability
Precedent Flag
Housing Accountability Act §65589.5(d) strips local discretionary denial authority when a jurisdiction is out of Housing Element compliance. Once filed, applications are vested even if HCD later certifies a compliant Element.
Applicant Strategy
File before Oct 14 recertification. Expect 12–18 months of post-filing negotiation. Plan for density-bonus resubmittal as the likely settlement structure. The filing establishes legal leverage; the negotiation defines what actually gets built.
Recommendation
FAVORABLE WINDOW. Strong statutory backstop. File immediately. Budget for negotiation. Do not count on the as-filed project getting built — count on the legal position forcing a deal.
The Decision Framework
Three questions every California developer should answer before filing.
Builder’s Remedy is not a project strategy — it is a negotiation strategy. The filing establishes leverage. The settlement defines what gets built.
01
If screening California Housing Element non-compliant cities
Track HCD's quarterly compliance list. File AS SOON as non-compliance is confirmed — the window closes when HCD certifies the next Housing Element. Santa Monica's window was eight months. Cupertino's non-compliance window was six years. The length of the window is a HCD-specific variable that moves with the jurisdiction's own submission and revision cadence.
02
If anticipating post-filing negotiation
The Santa Monica settlement of May 2023 traded Builder's Remedy applications for density-bonus resubmittal rights. This is now the template — file to establish legal position, then negotiate for more cooperative development rights. Budget for 12–18 months of negotiation after filing. Do not underwrite the as-filed project; underwrite the settlement density.
03
Pattern: Builder's Remedy filings create leverage, not projects
Most Builder's Remedy applications in California have settled. Few have been built as-filed. The strategic value is establishing the legal position that forces cities to negotiate, not the specific project proposed. Screen jurisdictions for negotiation receptivity — Planning Director posture, City Manager political capital, prior settlement history — not just Housing Element status.
The lesson from Santa Monica:
State housing law gives California developers a powerful negotiating backstop when jurisdictions fall out of Housing Element compliance. But only developers who know the window — and the post-filing negotiation template — can convert filing leverage into built units. Most developers hear about Builder’s Remedy after the window has closed.
Know the window before it opens, not after it closes.
Intelligence Brief
How RealClear built this assessment.
Every feasibility score is backed by a traceable intelligence trail — real articles, real officials, real patterns.
News Articles Indexed
Key Officials Profiled
Comparable Projects Approved
Opposition Groups Tracked
Event Timeline
Key milestones in the entitlement journey
Oct 14, 2021
Santa Monica submits 6th Cycle Housing Element to HCD
Feb 8, 2022
HCD rejects Housing Element as non-compliant — Builder's Remedy window opens
Oct 14–31, 2022
16 Builder's Remedy applications filed in two weeks — 4,562 units
Oct 14, 2022
HCD certifies revised Housing Element (too late — applications vested)
May 2023
Santa Monica settles with WS Communities — density-bonus resubmittal template
Apr 2024
Two Builder's Remedy projects still moving through permits
Oct 14, 2021
Santa Monica submits 6th Cycle Housing Element to HCD
Feb 8, 2022
HCD rejects Housing Element as non-compliant — Builder's Remedy window opens
Oct 14–31, 2022
16 Builder's Remedy applications filed in two weeks — 4,562 units
Oct 14, 2022
HCD certifies revised Housing Element (too late — applications vested)
May 2023
Santa Monica settles with WS Communities — density-bonus resubmittal template
Apr 2024
Two Builder's Remedy projects still moving through permits
Key Actors
Decision-makers and their positions
Neil Shekhter / WS Communities
Primary Applicant
Filed 12 of 16 Builder's Remedy applications — concentration created the settlement counterparty
Mayor Gleam Davis / City Council
Municipal Governing Body
Explored litigation, then shifted to negotiation — standard California BR reaction arc
HCD Director Gustavo Velasquez
California State Housing Agency
Non-compliance finding Feb 2022 opened window; recertification Oct 14 2022 closed it
David White / Jing Yeo
City Manager / Planning Director
Led staff-side settlement negotiations — converted filing leverage into buildable density-bonus deal
Opposition Intelligence
Organized opposition groups
Santa Monica Anti-Density Neighborhood Coalition
Established neighborhood opposition present throughout 2022–2023 Council hearings
Tactics
Public comment, Council pressure, litigation advocacy during initial city reaction period
Track Record
Council explored challenges but ultimately settled — statutory posture of Builder's Remedy neutralized procedural opposition
Potential Allies
Groups that may support the project
YIMBY Law / California YIMBY
Statewide Housing Advocacy
Statewide legal and political support for Builder's Remedy enforcement; Santa Monica filings informed the subsequent Redondo Beach Chalfant ruling in Feb 2024
California HCD
State Regulatory Authority
HCD non-compliance determinations are the statutory trigger that strips local denial authority under Gov. Code §65589.5
Jurisdiction Pattern
What history tells us about this jurisdiction
Approval Rate
16 applications filed; most settled via density-bonus resubmittal May 2023; 2 projects still in permits as of Apr 2024
Recent Shifts
Santa Monica settlement established statewide template — file during non-compliance window, negotiate density-bonus resubmittal post-filing
Key Insight
Score: 72/100 green. Builder's Remedy filings create leverage, not projects. The eight-month non-compliance window from Feb 8 to Oct 14, 2022 was the legal opening; the May 2023 settlement was the outcome. Most applications in California have settled — few are built as filed. Underwrite the settlement density, not the as-filed project.
Intelligence compiled from 6 news sources (Slate, The Real Deal, LA Urbanize, Santa Monica Next, RAND), Santa Monica city filings, HCD Housing Element compliance records, and Cal. Gov. Code §65589.5 statutory analysis
Primary Source Documents
8 DocumentsEvery finding cited to the source. Click any document to preview it directly.
Know Your Window Before It Opens
The next Housing Element non-compliance window is opening right now.
RealClear tracks HCD compliance status across every California jurisdiction, maps the applicable Builder’s Remedy pathway, profiles the Planning Department and City Manager posture, and surfaces comparable settlement structures — before a single application is drafted.
AI-generated analysis · Not legal advice · Verify independently before making investment decisions