Hernandez

Hernandez v. City of Encinitas

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1009·28 Cal. App. 4th 1048·33 Cal. Rptr. 2d 875·94 Daily Journal DAR 13831·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7566
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1994D016586California9,687 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

In this mandate proceeding (Code Civ. Proc., § 1085) challenging the validity of the housing element and, to a lesser extent, the land use element of the April 24, 1990, version of the general plan for the City of Encinitas (City), three of the six petitioners (Plaintiffs Ismael Hernandez, Hildeberto Garcia and Buenaventura Ayala) are homeless day laborers working for years in North San Diego County and living from January to July 1989 in makeshift shelters on City hillsides. When working full weeks they earn no more than $200 per week. The other three petitioners (Plaintiffs Indelisa Rivera, Gustavo Terrazas and Ramon Torres) are permanent employees of a nursery in the City and have been unable to find decent, affordable housing there. These three petitioners gross no more than $1,200 per month. Under state law the household income of the six petitioners is considered lower or very low. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 50079.5, 50105.)

Generally, in three causes of action in the petition filed July 27, 1989, the petitioners contend City’s general plan adopted March 29, 1989, unreasonably restricts housing opportunities for poor people through a variety of exclusionary…

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.