The Week in Land Law - SB 9 and SB 10 land on Governor’s desk, new decisions re: wrongful eviction and violation of rent stabilization ordinance, and federal grazing laws

This week, SB 9 and SB 10 passed both houses of the State Legislature and made it to Governor Newsom’s desk. A couple of interesting new decisions came down regarding evidence in support of wrongful eviction and violation of a rent stabilization ordinance, and federal grazing laws.

Legislation:

• SB 9 and SB 10 passed and are awaiting Governor Newsom’s signature. Both bills bring sweeping changes to California’s land use and zoning laws. These bills are part of a housing production package that the State Legislature has pushed for the last several years - aiming to remove local control over zoning and centralize it in Sacramento, and to increase housing density throughout California. While this is a good thing for real estate developers and brokers (both bills were backed by building industry and realtors associations, as well as big tech companies), they will negatively impact most people who currently live in resource-strapped California communities. Both bills will give California more people, more structures, more vehicles, more traffic, less environmental review, less available parking, smaller setbacks, more stress on the electrical grid, more water consumption, more construction in wildfire zones, and less ability to fight back against laws passed by unresponsive government institutions. I’ve written about SB 9 here here and here. I am in the process of writing a long form article regarding the initiative and referendum powers and how bills like SB 10 impede these constitutionally protected rights. Stay tuned.

Case Law:

• Duncan v. Kihagi - filed Aug. 9, 2021, publication ordered Sept. 1, 2021, First District, Div. One; 2021 S.O.S. 4937

  • Wrongful eviction and harassment lawsuit against nightmare landlord.

  • The Court held that evidence of a landlords’ conduct at other rental properties can be used to show intent and bad faith in violation of a local rent stabilization ordinance.

• Corrigan v. Haaland - filed Sept. 2, 2021; 2021 S.O.S. 20-35393

  • Under the system established by the Taylor Grazing Act, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to divide public rangelands into grazing districts and to issue permits to private parties to graze livestock on the land.

  • Individuals who control land within or near a grazing district may receive a “preference” or “priority” to stand first in line in applying for a grazing permit. See Pub. Lands Council, 529 U.S. at 733–38.

  • The IBLA determined that once a permit expires and the BLM declines to renew it, the BLM need not separately cancel the associated preference, which expires alongside the permit.

  • The Ninth Circuit upheld the determination, holding that a grazing preference does not remain attached to base property until separately cancelled.