When the Alameda Superior Court docket dominated that the county’s COVID-19 eviction moratorium didn't apply in a housing dispute between a tenant and the town of Alameda, even the decide overseeing the case didn’t count on it to have bigger ramifications.
So it got here as fairly a shock when metropolis officers claimed Friday that the “landmark ruling” resolved a so-called “long-standing ambiguity” concerning the quantity of energy California counties have over the cities inside their boundaries.
Alameda contends the ruling has now set a precedent for whether or not counties can regulate included cities throughout occasions of emergency. If its interpretation is right — which has but to be examined by additional lawsuits — cities in Alameda County would have broad energy to disregard ordinances set by the county – from masks mandates and curfews to eviction moratoriums.
“When there’s a set of native legal guidelines, whether or not it’s curfews or emergency response, there may be one set of legal guidelines that applies to you, not two,” stated Alameda Metropolis Legal professional Yibin Shen. “The native authorities in Alameda is the town council.”
Does the court docket’s ruling signify an enormous shift within the stability of energy between counties and cities across the state?
Based on the protection legal professional within the case, it doesn't. Marc Janowitz, who represented the tenant, stated the town’s assertion in a information launch was “a want fairly than a reality” and “exaggerating to the purpose of deceptive.” As a matter of legislation, choices made by decrease courts, together with the Alameda Superior Court docket, don't maintain precedential worth.
Decide Victoria Kolakowski, in her determination, wrote that her judgment would “solely apply to the events on this case,” and that it could not have an effect on the county ordinance extra broadly.
By the decide’s personal phrases then, the county’s assertion will not be a landmark case, Janowitz stated.
The problem started in April 2022, when the town of Alameda moved to evict tenants from two separate single household houses on the island’s previous navy base. On the time, the county had – and nonetheless has – a moratorium towards evictions when a tenant is unable to pay due to COVID-19 associated lease debt.
The moratorium, which is shipped to run out in Might, states that it covers included and unincorporated areas of the county.
As a matter of process, when evictions are filed, a decide examines on the lawsuit and determines if the county’s eviction moratorium ought to apply. On this state of affairs, the Metropolis of Alameda selected to argue that the moratorium was unconstitutional, as a result of counties can't legally regulate included cities.
That method pressured the tenants to defend the constitutionality of a county ordinance, fairly than the deserves of their eviction circumstances. Though the moratorium was dominated constitutional in a unique federal lawsuit difficult the identical ordinance, on this case the decide in the end dominated within the metropolis’s favor.
Even when the ruling doesn’t in the end set a bigger precedent, extra cities might try to take action – particularly those who have resisted pandemic-era restrictions enacted by county governments.
The notion of autonomy granted to a neighborhood authorities by the state structure is a thorny one, stated Tom Hogen-Esch, a political science professor at California State College Northridge.
“When you draw that boundary and also you’re a metropolis, you principally have dwelling rule over a bunch of various issues, for higher or worse,” Hogen-Esch stated. “It is a longstanding, most likely 100-year debate over ‘How far does the extent of dwelling rule go?’”
Based on Shen, the town has taken the place quite a few occasions all through the pandemic that county ordinances don't apply to included cities. One such occasion was when the county declared a state of emergency throughout protests after George Floyd’s homicide and issued an 8 p.m. curfew. The Metropolis of Alameda declined to increase that curfew, making a complicated state of affairs for residents.
“Points like this come up and there’s not a variety of clear, clear legislation,” stated Hogen-Esch. “One decide in a single a part of California would possibly say one factor, and one other would possibly say one other factor. It should work its approach up by means of the authorized system in California, and in the end the California Supreme Court docket attracts strains about who has this authority.”
Alameda County might have stepped in to defend the constitutionality of its eviction moratorium, however didn't. Janowitz hypothesized that the deaths of two pro-tenant supervisors, Richard Valle and Wilma Chen, might have shifted the political middle of the board of supervisors, making them much less keen to defend a now 3-year-old ordinance. The case will now transfer ahead as a daily eviction dispute.
Shen stated the town’s objective was to not debate the deserves of an eviction moratorium, however fairly to supply extra readability about whose legal guidelines utilized, and when.
“It has nothing to do with which units of legal guidelines are higher,” Shen stated. “I’m certain the town and county of San Francisco have adopted nice legal guidelines. They only don’t apply to the town of Alameda.”