ENCINITAS —In the latest salvo over Santa Fe Drive, the Encinitas City Council has decided to sue the state over a recently signed law restricting further changes to the roadway.
City Attorney Ajit Thind said during the Oct. 21 City Council meeting that the council had voted 4-1 in closed session, with Councilmember Joy Lyndes dissenting, to authorize litigation against the state over the approval of Senate Bill 114.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed SB 114 on Sept. 18. The budget trailer bill included, among other provisions, language added by state Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, in the closing days of the legislative session specifically concerning the stretch of Santa Fe Drive south of San Dieguito Academy.
The provision prohibits modifications to the separated bike lanes for five years after the project’s completion and requires Encinitas to repay state grant funds used to transform the roadway into its current configuration if the city makes prohibited changes.
Blakespear, a former Encinitas mayor, helped secure $3.09 million in state funding for separated bike lanes and other roadway improvements in 2023.
Construction of the western segment began in January 2024 and was completed in April 2025. The project narrowed vehicle lanes to 10 feet, added angled back-in parking and installed separated bicycle lanes, along with pedestrian improvements and other traffic-calming measures.
The City Council voted 4-1 in November 2025 to pursue additional changes, including removing the south-side barrier-protected bicycle lane, replacing back-in parking with parallel spaces and widening vehicle lanes to 11 feet. The reconstruction effort is expected to cost more than $3 million.
The council voted 4-1 again in June 2026 to continue designing the changes after reviewing plans at the 50% design stage. The redesign would retain the separated westbound bicycle lane on the north side of Santa Fe Drive.
Lyndes cast the dissenting votes in both November 2025 and June 2026.
Blakespear previously said she would not oppose other roadway changes as long as the protected bicycle lanes remained.
“I would not interfere with their desire to make other changes to the road as long as the barrier-protected bike lanes remained,” she said. “But removing them and returning the roadway to a less safe condition after using state General Fund money that I requested is something I would fight.”
In June, Blakespear took SB 569, which had passed the Senate as a measure addressing homeless encampments, and used a procedure known as “gut and amend” to shift its focus to bicycle lane infrastructure.
At the time, she told The Coast News that the “gut and amend” strategy was prompted in part by Santa Fe Drive but was also intended to ensure that removing bike lanes faced the same scrutiny as installing them.
“The process needs to be more robust,” Blakespear said. “There needs to be a safety review and public notice of the consequences.”
Mayor Bruce Ehlers told The Coast News at the time that he objected to the “gut and amend” approach and the overall goals of SB 569.
“A former mayor of Encinitas is trying to force her will on a duly elected council,” Ehlers said. “My problem is the subversive nature of her tactics.”
Ehlers later testified before the California Transportation Commission, arguing that SB 569 would not apply to Santa Fe Drive because the legislation was not retroactive.
SB 569 was moved to the inactive file Aug. 31 without receiving a final vote.
Unlike SB 569, SB 114 specifically applies to the completed portion of Santa Fe Drive, a provision the city now plans to challenge in court.
Ehlers addressed the legal action at the North County Mayors’ Forum on Oct. 22 at Pacific Ridge School in Carlsbad, which was moderated by the author of this article.
In response to a question from Tyler Durina, a 16-year-old junior, Ehlers argued that budget trailer bills are meant to address fiscal matters, not make unrelated policy changes.
“It’s actually a preclusion to have policy changes in a fiscal bill,” he said. “One instance of this in this bill is that it said we can’t do any changes to Santa Fe Drive for five years. That is purely policy. There is not a fiscal component there, that is a policy change. Probably illegal, in my opinion.”
He added that council members had reached a consensus during the closed session that the bill was flawed in multiple ways.
“This is far from over,” Ehlers said. “There are many other avenues that can be taken from here in addition to the future legislative action.”
This story will be updated as The Coast News learns more.
