Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)

Citation
Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Parent Document
Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1976-06-16

Other Sections in This Document (374)

Full Text

1,072 chars
Here the charter amendment drastically and unnecessarily restricts the rent control board’s power to adjust rents, thereby making inevitable the arbitrary imposition of unreasonably low rent ceilings. It is clear that if the base rent for all controlled units were to remain as the maximum rent for an indefinite period many or most rent ceilings would be or become confiscatory. For such rent ceilings of indefinite duration an adjustment mechanism is constitutionally necessary to provide for changes in circumstances and also provide for the previously mentioned situations in which the base rent cannot reasonably be deemed to reflect general market conditions. The mechanism is sufficient for the required purpose only if it is capable of providing adjustments in maximum rents without a substantially greater incidence and degree of delay than is practically necessary. “Property may be as effectively taken by long-continued and unreasonable delay in putting an end to confiscatory rates as by an express affirmance of them . . . .” (Smith v. Illinois Bell Tel. Co.