Santa Barbara County Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson declined to step down from discussions on the Richards Ranch annexation proposal during a meeting in early May although the applicant's attorney questioned whether he had displayed bias. Nelson serves on the Santa Barbara County Local Agency Formation Commission and has been named in a lawsuit questioning handling of the Richards Ranch project.
Santa Barbara County Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson declined to step down from discussions on the Richards Ranch annexation proposal during a meeting in early May although the applicant's attorney questioned whether he had displayed bias. Nelson serves on the Santa Barbara County Local Agency Formation Commission and has been named in a lawsuit questioning handling of the Richards Ranch project. Credit: Janene Scully / Noozhawk file photo

The developer behind a mixed-used project planned for the border between Orcutt and Santa Maria has filed a lawsuit contending that Santa Barbara County has acted in bad faith, one of two legal cases related to the project. 

Richards Ranch LLC, represented by Beth Collins of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP, sued Santa Barbara County and the Board of Supervisors in Superior Court, contending that they have violated laws to facilitate development of new housing.

“In the midst of a severe housing crisis gripping the state of California, respondents are flouting their responsibilities to process a housing project that is protected by state law,” the lawsuit contends.

It’s one of two lawsuits filed against the county regarding Richards Ranch. 

The second lawsuit has been filed by Californians for Homewnership, part of the California Association of Realtors. The lawsuit filed by Matthew P. Gelfand against the county also challenges the handling of the Richards Ranch application. 

The development is proposed for 44 acres on Union Valley Parkway east of Highway 135 in Orcutt.

However, Richards Ranch, led by Michael Stoltey, is pursuing two routes to get built.

One application seeks to build 500 apartments and 100 townhomes plus businesses and was submitted to the City of Santa Maria. That would require the city to annex the land, which has sparked strong opposition from Orcutt residents.

A second application, with 750 apartments, was submitted in December 2023 to the Santa Barbara County Planning & Development Department under the state’s Builder’s Remedy provisions.

Richards Ranch developer Michael Stoltey speaks to the Santa Barbara County Local Agency Formation Commission in early May.
Richards Ranch developer Michael Stoltey is seen in early May speaking to the Santa Barbara County Local Agency Formation Commission about the proposed project. Credit: Janene Scully / Noozhawk photo

Builder’s Remedy grants developer concessions such as reduced parking requirements, fewer setbacks or waivers of certain building codes to help reduce costs of creating new housing.

As required under Builder’s Remedy in exchange for concessions, 150 units of Richards Ranch would be deed restricted or designated for lower-income buyers or renters.

“Respondents’ violations of state law constitute a bad faith course of conduct designed to defeat the project through procedural gimmicks and strained interpretations, subverting state laws intended to streamline housing production,” the Richards Ranch LLC-filed lawsuit contends.

The lawsuit cited the county’s “bad faith attempt — seemingly fueled by one board member — to rob petitioner of its statutory rights to various processing protections for the project.”

Later, the lawsuit named Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson, who represents Orcutt and part of Santa Maria plus other areas. 

As the developer encountered opposition to the annexation plan and filed a second proposal under Builder’s Remedy, Stoltey still found the project facing hurdles.

Referring to a December 2023 conversation with a Richards Ranch representative, the lawsuit claimed Nelson said he “would prevent the Builder’s Remedy project, oppose the annexation at LAFCO, and work to delay the LAFCO process indefinitely.”

“He even threatened that it would be very hard to get any project through,” the lawsuit contends.

Santa Barbara County does not comment on pending litigation, a spokeswoman said. 

The county’s attorneys are expected to file a written response to the lawsuits in the coming weeks.

During a Santa Barbara County Local Agency Formation Commission meeting about the annexation proposal last month, Nelson addressed some of the allegations, including whether he should step aside from discussions and votes. 

While the comments were mostly geared toward the annexation proposal, Nelson also touched on broader accusations he called troubling.

“It feels like an act of desperation by the developer and their counsel, and I’m really sorry that it’s come to this,” Nelson said. “There’s been a lot of noise in our community about the project, a lot of accusations thrown around about me, the developer, their investors, even the mayor.”

He also disputed the accuracy of the conversations and context.

The Richards Ranch lawsuit lists seven causes of action, including violation of the Housing Accountability Act, violation of the Permit Streamlining Act and violation of the California Environmental Quality Act. 

The lawsuit by Californians for Homeownership lists two causes of action related to violating the Housing Accountability Act.

Both have asked the judge to intervene plus asked for lawsuit costs, attorney’s fees and fines. 

The first case management conference is set for Sept. 3 before Santa Barbara Judge Thomas Anderle. 

— Noozhawk North County editor Janene Scully can be reached at jscully@noozhawk.com. Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.