Rental Housing Owners Assn. v. City of Hayward
Following entry of judgment in favor of Rental Housing Owners Association of Southern Alameda County, Inc. (RHOA) on its petition for writ of mandate, the trial court issued a peremptory writ of mandate enjoining the City of Hayward (City) from enforcing the Mandatory Inspection Program (MIP) incorporated in its Residential Rental Inspection Ordinance (ordinance). The trial court concluded the ordinance was unconstitutional on its face because it forced landlords to grant City inspectors access to occupied units without the consent of the tenant, in violation of California Civil Code section 1954 and the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Accordingly, the trial court enjoined enforcement of Hayward Municipal Code sections 9‑5.306 (Entry) and 9‑5.401 (Fees/Penalty Charges), and commanded the City to repeal or cure the constitutional and statutory defects in these sections.
In response to the writ, the City amended the ordinance and filed a Return to Writ of Mandate.[1] RHOA filed Objections to City's Return to Writ of Mandate, asserting that the amended ordinance failed to cure the constitutional defects identified by the trial court in its earlier judgment. The trial court sustained two of the five objections raised by RHOA. The court found that the amended ordinance was unconstitutional on its face because landlords continued to be responsible for obtaining tenants' consent and could incur fines or penalties when tenants refused to permit entry to officials for inspection.
The City appeals the trial court's order sustaining RHOA's objections to its return to writ of mandate. Having considered the arguments presented, including those of amicus curiae for RHOA, California Apartment Association (CAA),[2] we vacate the trial court's order and remand with instructions that the trial court enter a new and different order consistent with this opinion.
Comments on Rental Housing Owners Assn. v. City of Hayward