Sierra Lake Reserve v. The City of Rocklin the Rocklin Mobile Home Rent Review Commission Carlos Urrutia Rusty Selix Rudolf Michaels George Paras

938 F.2d 951 SIERRA LAKE RESERVE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY OF ROCKLIN; the Rocklin Mobile Home Rent Review Commission; Carlos Urrutia; Rusty Selix; Rudolf Michaels; George Paras, Defendants-Appellees. No. 89-15371. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 15, 1990. Decided July 9, 1991. William H. Plageman, Jr., and Anthony C. Rodriguez, Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges, Oakland, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, McDonough, Holland & Allen, Sacramento, Cal., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Before GOODWIN, KOZINSKI and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge. 1 Sierra Lake, a mobile home park owner, alleges that the City of Rocklin's rent control ordinances had effected a taking of its property without just compensation; plaintiff also complains of due process and equal protection violations in connection with the passage and implementation of the ordinances. 2 We consider whether plaintiff's taking claim is ripe for adjudication in federal court despite its failure to exhaust state judicial remedies and whether the district…

concurring.

Today we hold that the Rocklin rent control ordinance, as applied, results in a physical taking of private property. We reach this result because the law of the circuit is found in Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, 833 F.2d 1270 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 940 , 108 S.Ct. 1120 , 99 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988).

I concur under the compulsion of precedent, but for the record I want to note that I have not forgotten the difference between the physical and the metaphysical. Hall reached a commendable legislative result by calling a regulatory ordinance a physical taking. I am in somewhat the same position as I found myself upon first reading Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 , 93 S.Ct. 705 , 35 L.Ed.2d 147 (1973), applauding the result but disturbed by the method. Nonetheless, stare decisis is a proven policy, and I concur.

Sierra Lake, a mobile home park owner, alleges that the City of Rocklin’s rent control ordinances had effected a taking of its property without just compensation; plaintiff also complains of due process and equal protection violations in connection with the passage and implementation of the ordinances.

We consider whether plaintiff’s taking claim is ripe for adjudication in federal court despite its failure to exhaust state judicial remedies and whether the district court properly dismissed Sierra Lake’s procedural due process and equal protection claims. We also consider whether plaintiff adequately pleaded a substantive due process claim and, if so, whether it was properly dismissed without leave to amend.

Facts

Sierra Lake bought a mobile home park in the City of Rocklin in late 1978, at a time when no rent control was in effect. On September 1, 1979, Sierra Lake raised its rents to cover the cost of improvements. On November 5, the City imposed rent control on Rocklin mobile home parks and set all rents at their July 1979 level — effectively cancelling Sierra Lake’s September rent increase.

Sierra Lake continued to make capital improvements and, on October 16, 1984,…