pf_01912 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The legal issues revolve around how far can the City go in imposing such conditions. The authority is the proper exercise of the police power and the test is reasonableness. II. THE PROPER EXERCISE OF POLICE POWER In attaching conditions to development approval, whether it be dedications or in lieu fees, the city is relying on the exercise of its police power. The police power, even though established by common law, is set forth in the California Constitution which states that "a county or city may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with gerpral laws.(Article XI, $ 7)." It is well established that the proper exercise of that power does not constitute a taking or a deprivation of property without due process of law. The courts have long held that a state or city may take property without paying due compensation when it acts reasonably under its police power. The California Supreme Court in $e._._.lby E2AItj Co. vp City of San Buenaventura, 10 Cal. 3d 1101 119 (1973), stated: It is too clearly established to require extensive citation of authority that under certain circumstances a governmental body may require the dedication of property as a condition for its development (see, e.g., Associated Borne Builders, etc., Inc. v CitX of Walnut Creek, 4 dal. 13 633 p 639 et se .y1 Ayres v. City Council of Los Angeles, 34 Cam. �J1, � s The 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution prevents- arbitrary or unreasonable exercise of the police power. 'Ho{w►ever, regulation under a proper exercise of that power is due process, even though property in whole or in part may be taken or destroyed, or burdens or expenses of various types may be imposed. Due process is not to be construed to put the federal, state and loca3, governments into a straightjacket and prevent them from adapting laws and regulations to the continuous change in social and ,economic conditions which are constantly coming within the field of their operation. regulations are sustained under the complex conditions of today which but a short time ago Might have been condemned as arbitrary and unreasonable. Euclid v. Arnim Realt Co.. 272 U.S. 3551 387 (192""A The-U-n-fted-states Supreme Court, in discussing what traditionally has been known as the police poorer, stated in Berman v. Pam, 349 U.S. 26 (1954) x -2-