CABINDA

CABINDA v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd.

Good Law
80 Cal. App. 4th 853·95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 676
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 23, 2000B133077California4,591 words

Opinion

Opinion

The determinative question in this case is whether regulations adopted by the Santa Monica Rent Control Board governing vacancy decontrol are preempted by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. We agree with the trial court's conclusion that they are and affirm the order.

The City of Santa Monica has had a system of residential rent control in place since 1979. The Santa Monica Rent Control Charter Amendment (the Rent Control Law) is administered by an elected Rent Control Board (the Board). In addition to regulating permissible increases in rents, the Rent Control Law protected tenants from the removal of controlled rental units from the housing market, required just cause for eviction from a controlled rental unit, and provided that rents would remain controlled after a tenant vacated his or her unit.

In 1995, the Legislature enacted the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act (Civ. Code, § 1954.50, [1] et seq., (Costa-Hawkins)), which provides for vacancy decontrol of rental rates, whether or not the rental property is subject to rent control. Under Costa-Hawkins, effective January 1, 1999, a landlord may establish the initial and subsequent rental rates for new…

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.