Santa Monica : Court Upholds Decision on Rent Study

A three-member panel of the state Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld a Superior Court judge’s decision that Santa Monica did not have to prepare an environmental impact report when it placed an amendment to the city’s rent control law on the Nov. 6, 1984, ballot.

The measure, Proposition XX, comprehensively revised the city’s strict rent law that was approved in 1979. Proposition XX was approved by a vote of 18,950 to 17,685.

Attorney Stephen Jones filed a lawsuit on behalf of two Santa Monica landlords last summer, claiming that the city had to do an environmental impact study before putting the measure on the ballot. A Santa Monica Superior Court judge ruled that the city did not have to conduct the study.

City Atty. Robert M. Myers said, “We won another one,” when asked about the Court of Appeal decision. Jones could not be reached for comment.

“The exquisite irony of the whole thing,” said Charles Ishman, executive vice president of the Apartment Assn. of Greater Los Angeles, “is the City of Santa Monica maintains that rent control has no impact on the environment and the quality of the housing stock. . . . That of course is completely false. All one has to do is drive around the city and see the increasing deferred maintenance that’s occurring.”

In West Hollywood, landlords have said they may sue the City Council to force it to prepare an environmental impact report on a proposed rent control law.

Myers said that the ruling, which was unpublished, would not affect a possible West Hollywood case. “All we were doing in Santa Monica was making amendments to a pre-existing rent control law and the situation in West Hollywood is factually different,” Myers said.