Venice Town Council, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 729·47 Cal. App. 4th 1547·55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 465·96 Daily Journal DAR 9271·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5705
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 31, 1996B091312California7,563 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

This case raises the issue whether the Mello act (Gov. Code, §§ 65590 & 65590.1) imposes a mandatory duty on local governments to require developers to replace residential units, or pay an in-lieu fee, whenever they demolish or convert dwelling units occupied by low- or moderate-income persons in the coastal zone. Appellants, the Venice Town Council, Inc., the Barton-Hill Neighborhood Association and Carol Berman, a low-income tenant who resides in Venice, contend the Mello act imposes such a duty. Respondent, the City of Los Angeles (City), argues the Mello act imposes no mandatory duties on local governments. It claims the Mello act only requires replacement dwelling units when the City in its discretion determines replacement of low- or moderate-income housing is “feasible.”

We conclude the City’s interpretation of its responsibilities under the Mello act is erroneous. The plain language of the statute imposes a mandatory duty on the City in certain circumstances to require replacement housing for low- or moderate-income persons or families where units occupied by qualifying persons are converted or destroyed. We further conclude the City has no discretion to allow a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.