Ocean House Corp. v. Permanent Rent Control Board
Before: Woodmansee
Opinion
WOODMANSEE, J.
*
In 1979 Santa Monica adopted a rent control charter amendment. For many previous years, the Ocean House Corporation (Ocean House) had operated its property in Santa Monica as a community care facility under the state California Community Care Facilities Act (the Act). The Permanent Rent Control Board of the City of Santa Monica (the Board) claimed that a landlord-tenant relationship existed under the newly enacted local law, requiring Ocean House to register.
Ocean House obtained a peremptory writ of mandate requiring the Board and the city (together, Santa Monica) not to apply local rent control law to it. The trial court found that state law had preempted the field.
[397]
We affirm the judgment.
State Preemption
A charter city is competent to “. . . make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to restrictions and limitations provided in their several charters and in respect to other matters they shall be subject to general laws. ...” (Cal. Const., art. XI, § 5, subd. (a).) On matters of general or statewide concern, general law controls.
(Lancaster
v.
Municipal Court
(1972) 6 Cal.3d 805, 807-808 [100 Cal.Rptr. 609, 494 P.2d 681].)
The Act and its authorized regulations (Health & Saf. Code, § 1500 et seq.; Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 22, § 80000 et seq.) show a comprehensive state regulatory scheme covering several types of facilities, one of which is that type of community care facility operated by Ocean House.
We have considered “the whole purpose and scope of the legislative scheme” as well as the express language of the statutes.
(In re Lane
(1962) 58 Cal.2d 99, 102-103 [22 Cal.Rptr. 857, 372 P.2d 897].) The standards of care and services required of a community care facility are set forth in title 22 of the California Administrative Code. A community care facility is there defined as including a facility that provides nonmedical care and supervision to “. . . adults, or children and adults, and may include but is not limited to facilities for the developmentally disabled, physically handicapped, mentally disordered, or incompetent persons, ...” (Cal. Admin. Code, § 80003.) In assuming the care and supervision of senior citizens within that definition, Ocean House, as a state licensed community care facility is bound under California Administrative Code section 80051 to provide for their wide-ranging needs, including “. . . assistance in dressing, grooming, bathing, and other personal hygiene; assistance in taking medication . . .”; “arrangement of and assistance with medical and dental care . . .”; “maintenance or supervision of resident monies or property; and monitoring food intake or special diets.”
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)