SR-11-B (12)
C/ED:MT:RF:db
CouncIl MeetIng: June 26, 1984
\ \D ~.JDV \
Santa MonIca, CalIfornIa
1/-8
Jill 2 6 ..
TO:
Mayor and CIty CouncIl
FROM:
CIty Staff
SUBJECT:
RecommendatIon to approve Three Month CIty
Preparaton PerIod for ImplementatIon of
OwnershIp RIghts Charter Amendment (TORCA)
AuthorIze Related Funds for ExpendIture Through
15, 1984.
Staff
Tenant
and to
October
IntroductIon
ThIS report outlInes a plannIng process to be undertaken by the
CIty Manager's OffIce and Department of CommunIty and EconomIC
Development to Implement recently passed PropOSItIon X - Tenant
OwnershIp RIghts Charter Amendment (TORCA).
The report requests
the CounCIl to approve a three month preparatIon perIod, dIrect
the CIty Manager to Instruct CIty staff to proceed as outlIned
and to authorIze expendIture of necessary funds.
Background
On June 5, 1984, the voters of Santa MonIca approved passage of a
Charter Amendment intended to allow converSIon of rental unIts to
tenant ownershIp.
BaSIcally, TORCA WIll allow converSIon from rental unIts to
condomInIums (or cooperatIves) by owners of such propertIes, If
the unIts are offered for sale to present tenants.
There are a
varIety of protectIons for tenants In regard to converSIon
actIVItIes, I.e. offerIng prIce optIon perIod, rIght of tenancy
11-8
JUN 2 6 WI4
- 1 -
# ,
The Map Act provldes that proceedings for reversion to
acreage shall be commenced by flling a petition (Section
66499.13) and conducting a notlced public hearing (Sectlon
66499.15). In order to approve a petltlon for reversion, the
leglslatlve body must flnd:
(a) Dedications of land that
would be vacated by the reversion are
not necessary for present or
prospective public purposes; and
(b) Either:
(1) All
owners
of
an
lnterest in the real property consent
to the reverSlOnj or
(2) Improvements required
by the flnal map have not been made
Within the tlme limits allowed; or
(3) No lots shown on the
final or parcel map have been sold
wlthln flve years from the date such
map was flIed for record,
Section 66499.16(b)(3) IS the subsection appllcable to
the situation in the City. There were many tentative
subdivision maps approved for condomtnlum conversion purposes
In the period lmmediatly before the adoption of Rent Control
In Aprll 1979, Final subdlvlslon maps for these proJects
would have been approved at various tlmes thereafter
Because of Section 1803(t) of the Rent Control Law, many of
2
~ ~
these subdIvided propert1es have never been sold as
condomInIums. See Santa MonIca PInes v. C1ty of Santa
MonIca, 35 Cal. 3d 858, 679 P,2d 27, 201 Cal. Rptr. 593
(1984). As a result, those subdivIded properties which have
not sold any units as condomIniums are technIcally subject to
a pet1tion for reverSlon to acreage.
There 1S a complete dirth of Judicial precedent dealIng
wIth the proprlety of the City 1nlt1at1ng reverSlon
proceedings under such circumstances. The lack of case law
is not surprls1ng; 1n our 11mlted survey we have found no
other Jurlsd1ctIon that has proceeded 1n th1S fashlon. Thus,
w1thout any direct or analagous judlcial precedent, the C1ty
should be gU1ded by common pr1nc1ples of due process and
legislative Intent In the adoptIon of this statutory
procedure.
We have dlscussed this issue wIth varIOUS mun1c1pal
attorneys who are fam1llar wIth the IntrIcacies of the Map
Act. Their response to the proposed Clty action was uniform.
All agreed that the statute dld not prohiblt such a procedure
although some doubt was expressed as to whether such result
was Intended by the statutory scheme. The apparent
legislat1ve intent was to regulate unsaleable lots of rural
desert lands which histor1cally have been subject to
fraudulent land transact1ons,
the use of the term "lots"
statute.
This 1ntent 1S evidenced by
rather than "unlts"
1n the
3
, i ....-""':
In addition, because of the pendency of the Santa
Monica Plnes case, the flve year perlod of SectIon 66499.16
would likely be tolled for the same policy considerations
artlculated in Sectlon 66452,6 of the Map Act.
Flnally, there was unanlmlty that lndlvlduals who lost
a flnal subdivision map would have tremendous financlal
lncentlve to lltlgate and the City would llkely lose such a
lawsult.
The comments of these well lnformed munlclpal attorneys
are llkely to be the reaction of the courts when presented
with such a situation.
Thus, to Initiate proceedings to
revert subdlvided lands to real property will likely result
In difflcult lltigatlon for the Clty.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that no actlon be taken
at thls tlme to revert condomlniums to acreage under the
Subdivlslon Map Act.
PREPARED BY:
Robert M. Myers, City Attorney
Jonathan S. Horne, Deputy Clty Attorney
4