King City Council approves updated ordinance to support seasonal employee housing.

King City Council unanimously approved 5-0, on Tuesday, Aug. 25, an ordinance updating Chapter 17.79 of the King City Municipal Code, which governs seasonal employee housing in the First Street Corridor zoning district and the Historic Corridor Revitalization Area.

The unanimous decision aims to remove local barriers and streamline the process of providing safe, affordable housing for agricultural workers in the region.

The approved ordinance repeals and replaces existing provisions in Chapter 17.79, which had become increasingly misaligned with the California Employee Housing Act and other state directives.

According to City Attorney Roy Santos and City Manager Jose Arreola, the previous local development standards conflicted with evolving state laws, creating unnecessary hurdles for seasonal employee housing development.

“The new ordinance ensures that King City remains compliant with state housing mandates while maintaining important health and safety regulations,” Santos said during the council meeting.

Santos added that aligning local zoning rules with state law helps facilitate the creation and maintenance of housing necessary to support the agricultural workforce that is vital to King City’s economy.

Key provisions in the ordinance include requiring seasonal employee housing for five or more workers to obtain and maintain permits from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as stipulated in the California Housing Employee Act. The ordinance also mandates timely submission of HCD permit copies to the City's Building and Safety Department to ensure ongoing regulatory compliance.

On Tuesday, Aug. 18, the Planning Commission, on a 3-2 vote, recommended the City Council approve the zoning text amendment after analyzing the proposal and finding it consistent with both City objectives and state requirements.

Santos emphasized that the changes are administrative in nature and do not alter zoning designations, densities, or the basic allowance for seasonal employee housing. The ordinance is exempt from additional environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, citing provisions that cover organizational and administrative activities and pointing to prior environmental documents, including an initial study and negative declaration adopted when the original ordinance was approved in 2018.

“Seasonal employee housing is critical to supporting our farmworkers and agricultural community,” Mayor Mike LeBarre said. “Removing outdated local barriers will encourage more development of safe and accessible housing, benefiting workers and the city alike.”

Several residents spoke during public comment who did not want the council to pass the ordinance.

Elise Cossart-Daly with Rava Ranches Inc., argued via Zoom how the city is dismantling hard-won community standards designed to provide dignified housing for farmworkers. She noted that earlier projects invested heavily in permanent, amenity-rich housing with on-site parking, circulation planning, and architectural treatments along First Street, under rules she understood would apply equally to all operators.

Another resident who spoke in person and did not provide their name, suggested the City’s move is driven less by statewide policy than by litigation pressure tied to a single, long-controversial facility, and warned that if King City eliminates its higher standards, future builders will be compelled to match the lowest permissible level of development to remain competitive.

“If you pass this ordinance change tonight, you wipe out 10 years of community progress. You signal to every grower and builder that doing things the right way was a mistake,” they said. “You force every future project down to the bare minimum barrack standards just to compete. Is that truly the legacy this city council wants to take?”

City Clerk Erica Sonne will post the ordinance, which will become effective 30 days following final adoption. Santos confirmed that costs associated with processing the ordinance will be covered by existing City funds.

Correction: This article has been updated to state the Planning Commission’s Aug. 18 vote was 3-2, not unanimous as was previously written.