Laserfiche WebLink
Supreme Court will accept review and engage in a to more robust analysis of the underlying <br /> issues than occurred in Palmer. <br /> II. The Characterization of Inclusionary Ordinances <br /> Since the First inclusionary ordinances were adopted in the early 1970s, legal analysts <br /> have variously characterized the ordinances as run-of-the-mill land use controls (like zoning <br /> ordinances), as rent and price controls, and as "exactions" more akin to impact fees and land <br /> dedications.' Nationally, courts have taken all three positions. The Palmer case is the first where <br /> a California court has taken a definitive position (although still leaving unresolved the issue of <br /> whether the base inclusionary requirement is a land use control or an exaction). <br /> A. Inclusionary Ordinances as Land Use Controls. <br /> From a city standpoint, it is most advantageous if inclusionary ordinances can he <br /> characterized as land use controls. As land use ordinances, they can then be enacted pursuant to <br /> ordinary state zoning legislation, and courts will apply the deferential rational basis test for local <br /> See Thomas Kleven, Inclusionary Ordinances - Policy and Legal Issues in Requiring Private Developers to Build <br /> Low Cost (lousing, 21 UCLA L. Rev. 1432. 1490 (1974). See also Barbara Ehrlich Kautz, In Defense of <br /> Inclusionary Zoning: Successfully Creating, Affordable I lousing, 36 USE L.Rev. 97/, 975 (2002); Fred P. <br /> Bosselman et al., Panel Comments, in Inclusionary Zoning Moves Downtown 41-54 (Dwight Merriam el al. eds., <br /> 1935); Daniel R. Mandelker, The Constitutionality of Inclusionary Zoning: An Overview, in Inclusionary Zoning <br /> Moves Downtown 31, 35-36; William W. Merrill III & Robert K. Lincoln, Linkage Fees and Fair Share <br /> Regulations: Law and Method, 25 Erb. Lou'. 223. 274(1993). Many commentators simply assume that inclusionary <br /> housing is an exaction. See Mark Fenster, Takings Formalism and Regulatory Formulas: Exactions and the <br /> Consequences of Clarity, 92 Ca/il: L. Rev. 609, 657 (2004); Lawrence Berger, Inclusionary Zoning Devices as <br /> Takings: The Legacy of the Mount Laurel Cases, 70 Neb. L. Rev. ISO, 221 (/991); Brian W. Blaesser, Inclusionary <br /> I lousing: There's a Better Way, Inclusionary Zoning: Lessons learned in Massachusetts, 2 NFIC Affordable [lousing <br /> Poly Rev. 14, 15 (Jan. 2002); Susan M. Denbo, Development Exactions: A New Way to Fund State and Local <br /> Government Infrastructure Improvements and Affordable Housing, 23 Real Estate L.J. 7, 11 (1994); Robert C. <br /> Lllickson, The Irony of"Inclusionary" Zoning,54 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1167, 1 211 (1951). One recert author assumes that <br /> inclusionary zoning is a price control. S'ee Benjamin Powell & Edward Stringham, ''The Economics of Inclusionary <br /> Ilousing Reclaimed:" I low Effective Are Price Controls?. 33 Flu St. 11 L. Rev.671, 672 (2005). <br /> 1' <br /> g9u6;i v7.26372.: <br /> - '11119 <br />