Mobile Home Park Rent Control: Physical Taking or Valid Economic Regulation?

Abstract

In the now famous trilogy of 1987 United States Supreme Court cases, two of the conflicts originated in California; and now the Supreme Court has accepted another California land-use case. By agreeing to hear Yee v. City of Escondido (No. 90-1947), the Supreme Court is confronted with the often-litigated issue of whether a mobile home park rent control ordinance constitutes a per se taking of property without just compensation. This most recent California land-use case reached the Supreme Court as a result of conflicting rulings between federal and state courts on the issue. In Yee, the Supreme Court has been asked to review: (1) whether the City of Escondido's mobile home rent control ordinance authorizes a “permanent physical occupation” of property; (2) whether the ordinance denies mobile home park owners economically viable use of their property; and (3) whether the ordinance substantially advances legitimate state interests even if future tenants may not receive exactly the same protection as existing tenants.