Buellton Sued over New Law Prohibiting Long-Term Stays at Motels on Avenue of Flags

---

This article was underwritten in part by the Mickey Flacks Journalism Fund for Social Justice, a proud, innovative supporter of local news. To make a contribution go to sbcan.org/journalism_fund.

---

Buellton’s new motel law is facing a legal challenge. The ordinance requires motels on one of the city’s main thoroughfares, Avenue of Flags, to stop renting to long-term tenants, as part of a broader effort to revitalize the avenue. The owner of the Farmhouse Motel, Kerry Moriarty, and his partners sued the city last month, alleging the ordinance illegally removes the affordable units the Farmhouse provides and targets the Farmhouse specifically. 

In a press release sent to the Independent on June 11, Moriarty wrote that he’s not opposed to planning and development “over the long term.” But the new law will require him to evict the low-income families he houses and will destroy his business, as he has to fund the shift in land use. 

“This is unjust, illegal, and simply bad policy,” the press release says. 

For more than two decades, the Farmhouse Motel has rented rooms with kitchens and kitchenettes as residential units. Rents go from between $900 to $1,200 per month, and the security deposit is about $500. Moriarty told the Independent that 12 tenants have lived in the Farmhouse for more than a decade. He said that three or four units at a given time offer transition housing, with folks living there for a few months at a time.

In a press release, Moriarty said many of his residents would struggle to find similar housing in the area. 

The ordinance is part of the city’s plan to make the avenue a commercial and community core for its residents. In 2017, the city published a specific plan for the avenue’s development — a document that the city has updated periodically since. That document includes distinct areas of the avenue. The Farmhouse’s section is labeled a travelers’ services district, with auto-oriented business and lodging envisioned. 

Last August, when the motel ordinance first came before the City Council, City Manager Scott Wolfe said that the motels posed a problem for redevelopment because the state viewed these properties as providing housing. Should the motel owners want to demolish or change their properties, Wolfe said, they would need to replace the housing the motels provide, which could impose a significant financial burden. 

Then came Polo Village, an affordable housing project built by the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Barbara. By investing in Polo Village, Buellton said it replaced the units provided by the motels on Avenue of Flags. The 2023 housing agreement between the city and the county’s housing authority states that the new housing project’s 48 units are considered replacement units. 

Two other affordable housing projects are opening in Buellton — Village Senior Apartments (which offers housing for seniors) and Buellton Garden Apartments, which is slated to open this summer. During the August meeting, city staff described outreach to notify tenants of the new affordable housing options and connect them with resources to get on waiting lists. 

Buellton tabled the motel ordinance in September and spent the next six months communicating with the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development. 

During this time, Moriarty’s attorney, Christopher Guillen, wrote a series of letters to Buellton, arguing reasons why the ordinance was illegal and requesting the city not adopt it. 

Ultimately, Buellton extended the ordinance’s required move-out timeline for motel tenants to 180 days for tenants not on waiting lists with the county’s Housing Authority or for an affordable housing project, and to two years for tenants who could prove they are on a waiting list. In an email, a Housing and Community Development employee wrote that senior management accepted the changes to the ordinance. Buellton’s City Council officially passed the ordinance on March 26. 

Moriarty’s legal team argues that the Farmhouse Motel is legally nonconforming. Legal nonconforming use generally occurs when zoning laws around a property change, making a once-legal use for a property no longer legal. The property is “grandfathered in” and, unless it’s substantially expanded or destroyed, can continue to operate. 

The complaint includes a letter sent by former planning director Andrea Kieffer, where Kieffer calls the property a “legal nonconforming use.”

The city has also said the Farmhouse was in violation of zoning laws. In 2001, the Farmhouse’s former owners sent a letter to the city saying that the property would operate as apartments and would therefore no longer need to pay transient occupancy taxes. The city denied this claim at the time, saying the change would violate Buellton’s municipal code, but that the owners could pursue a change-of-use permit. Eighteen years later, in the same letter where Kieffer says the property is legally nonconforming, she also writes that “there are no records showing the current use has ever been permitted on the property.” 

Still, the owner of a legally nonconforming property has rights, and Moriarty’s legal team says the ordinance violates those rights with this ordinance. The lawsuit alleges that Buellton failed to hold a hearing to terminate legal nonconforming use, as required by the city’s code. 

Then there’s the question of affordable housing. The lawsuit says that Buellton violates the Housing Crisis Act because the city has not made a zoning change at the same time of the ordinance to allow for the replacement of the units. The city has pointed to Polo Village as replacing the lost units. 

The lawsuit also alleges that the city is treating Farmhouse differently. The Farmhouse is one of four motels on Avenue of Flags that have, in recent years, operated as rentals (also called Single Room Occupancies or SROs). The San Marcos Motel rents just two rooms to long-term tenants, and the motel located at 480 Avenue of Flags has been slated for demolition for years. The ordinance exempts the nearby and size-comparable Red Rose Court, citing it as a historic building. The Farmhouse is, therefore, most impacted by the law. 

“The Ordinance unlawfully targets the Farmhouse, forcing the conversion of its residential use and displacement of City residents, while preserving Red Rose Court’s similar residential use without any lawful basis for doing so,” the complaint said.  

Other violations the lawsuit lists include violation of the California Environmental Quality Act, arguing that the change in use would require environmental review, and income discrimination. The lawsuit cites an email exchange between city employees where one employee describes the exempted Red Rose Court as “likely not affordable to lower income.” Red Rose Court was not available for comment on the cost of its studios at this time. 

The lawsuit claims that the city is biased against Moriarty, citing an earlier dispute wherein Moriarty offered a one-time payment for permitting violations on a different property he owns, which the city denied. In an email exchange between City Manager Scott Wolfe and city councilmembers, Councilmember Hudson Hornick wrote to “bust his balls” over the violation. Hornick excused himself from the motel ordinance vote. 

Moriarty said he offered the City of Buellton a settlement, wherein he would phase in and implement the change over about five years, but that the city rejected the offer. A mandatory settlement meeting is scheduled for June 23. 

The City of Buellton said it could not respond to a request for comment, citing ongoing litigation.