pennell
san
jose
argued
november
decided
february
san
jose
rent
control
ordinance
ordinance
landlord
may
automatically
raise
annual
rent
tenant
possession
much
eight
percent
tenant
objects
higher
increase
hearing
required
determine
whether
landlord
proposed
increase
reasonable
circumstances
hearing
officer
directed
consider
specified
factors
including
hardship
tenant
appellants
individual
landlord
apartment
house
owners
association
association
represents
owners
lessors
real
property
located
san
jose
filed
action
seeking
declaration
ordinance
particularly
tenant
hardship
provision
facially
invalid
federal
constitution
entered
judgment
pleadings
appellants
favor
california
appeal
affirmed
however
california
reversed
rejecting
appellants
arguments
takings
clause
fifth
amendment
equal
protection
due
process
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
held
appellants
standing
challenge
ordinance
constitutionality
even
though
allege
either
individual
appellant
appellant
association
members
hardship
tenants
might
trigger
ordinance
hearing
process
aggrieved
hearing
officer
determination
certain
proposed
rent
increase
unreasonable
ground
tenant
hardship
standing
challenged
basis
pleadings
material
allegations
complaint
must
taken
true
complaint
must
construed
favor
complaining
party
appellants
alleged
properties
subject
ordinance
stated
oral
argument
association
represents
residential
unit
owners
city
many
hardship
tenants
thus
likelihood
enforcement
ordinance
concomitant
probability
rent
reduced
landlord
otherwise
able
obtain
sufficient
threat
actual
injury
satisfy
art
iii
requirement
plaintiff
challenges
law
must
demonstrate
realistic
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
law
operation
enforcement
pp
appellants
contention
application
ordinance
tenant
hardship
provision
violates
takings
clause
since
reducing
tenant
hardship
otherwise
reasonable
rent
objective
factors
specified
ordinance
relating
landlord
costs
rental
market
condition
accomplishes
taking
transfer
landlord
property
individual
hardship
tenants
premature
evidence
tenant
hardship
provision
fact
ever
relied
upon
hearing
officer
reduce
rent
figure
set
basis
specified
factors
addition
ordinance
require
hearing
officer
fact
reduce
proposed
rent
increase
grounds
tenant
hardship
makes
mandatory
tenant
hardship
considered
takings
cases
constitutionality
laws
decided
except
actual
factual
setting
makes
decision
necessary
pp
mere
provision
ordinance
hearing
officer
may
consider
tenant
hardship
finally
fixing
reasonable
rent
render
ordinance
facially
invalid
due
process
clause
ordinance
purpose
preventing
unreasonable
rent
increases
caused
city
housing
shortage
legitimate
exercise
appellees
police
powers
moreover
merit
appellants
argument
arbitrary
discriminatory
demonstrably
irrelevant
appellees
attempt
accomplish
additional
goal
reducing
burden
housing
costs
tenants
requiring
hardship
tenant
considered
determining
amount
excess
rent
increase
reasonable
circumstances
protection
consumer
welfare
legitimate
rational
goal
price
rate
regulation
ordinance
scheme
represents
rational
attempt
accommodate
conflicting
interests
protecting
tenants
rent
increases
time
ensuring
landlords
guaranteed
fair
return
investment
pp
ordinance
face
violate
equal
protection
clause
classification
scheme
rationally
related
legitimate
purpose
protecting
tenants
irrational
ordinance
treat
landlords
differently
basis
whether
hardship
tenants
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
brennan
white
marshall
blackmun
stevens
joined
scalia
joined
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
joined
post
kennedy
took
part
consideration
decision
case
harry
miller
argued
cause
appellants
briefs
burch
fitzpatrick
gary
rosenberg
joan
gallo
argued
cause
appellees
brief
george
rios
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
california
association
realtors
william
pfeiffer
national
apartment
association
et
al
jon
smock
wilbur
haines
iii
jeffrey
gale
national
association
realtors
william
north
national
multi
housing
council
lawrence
simons
michael
fine
rent
stabilization
association
new
york
city
et
al
erwin
griswold
washington
legal
foundation
daniel
popeo
paul
kamenar
todd
natkin
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
john
powell
steven
shapiro
helen
hershkoff
paul
hoffman
mark
rosenbaum
american
federation
labor
congress
industrial
organizations
robert
weinberg
laurence
gold
asian
law
alliance
et
al
brenton
rogozen
center
constitutional
rights
frank
deale
national
housing
law
project
david
bryson
national
institute
municipal
law
officers
william
thornton
roger
cutler
roy
bates
william
taube
conference
mayors
et
al
benna
ruth
solomon
bartow
farr
iii
briefs
amici
curiae
filed
city
santa
monica
et
al
joseph
lawrence
karl
manheim
joel
levy
hadassa
gilbert
manuela
albuquerque
raymond
ott
mary
jo
levinger
marc
hynes
jayne
williams
duane
lyders
louise
renne
roger
picquet
steven
amerikaner
mark
sellers
john
powers
competitive
enterprise
institute
sam
kazman
national
association
home
builders
et
al
gus
bauman
chief
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
case
involves
challenge
rent
control
ordinance
enacted
city
san
jose
california
allows
hearing
officer
consider
among
factors
hardship
tenant
determining
whether
approve
rent
increase
proposed
landlord
appellants
richard
pennell
apartment
house
owners
association
sued
superior
santa
clara
county
seeking
declaration
ordinance
particular
tenant
hardship
provisions
facially
unconstitutional
therefore
illegal
void
superior
entered
judgment
pleadings
favor
appellants
sustaining
claim
tenant
hardship
provisions
violated
takings
clause
fifth
amendment
made
applicable
fourteenth
amendment
california
appeal
affirmed
judgment
cal
app
cal
rptr
california
reversed
cal
divided
vote
majority
rejected
appellants
arguments
takings
clause
equal
protection
due
process
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
dissenters
thought
tenant
hardship
provisions
forced
subsidy
imposed
landlord
violation
takings
clause
appellants
appeal
postponed
consideration
question
jurisdiction
heard
oral
argument
affirm
judgment
california
city
san
jose
enacted
rent
control
ordinance
ordinance
stated
purpose
alleviat
ing
immediate
needs
created
san
jose
housing
situation
needs
include
limited
prevention
excessive
unreasonable
rent
increases
alleviation
undue
hardships
upon
individual
tenants
assurance
landlords
fair
reasonable
return
value
property
san
jose
municipal
ordinance
hardship
tenants
case
rent
increase
portion
thereof
exceeds
standard
set
section
respect
excess
whether
allow
part
increase
allowed
chapter
hearing
officer
shall
consider
economic
financial
hardship
imposed
present
tenant
tenants
unit
units
increases
apply
balance
hearing
officer
determines
proposed
increase
constitutes
unreasonably
severe
financial
economic
hardship
particular
tenant
may
order
excess
increase
subject
consideration
subparagraph
section
portion
thereof
disallowed
tenant
whose
household
income
monthly
housing
expense
meets
certain
income
requirements
shall
deemed
suffering
financial
economic
hardship
must
weighed
hearing
officer
determination
burden
proof
establishing
economic
hardship
shall
tenant
turn
merits
appellants
contentions
consider
claim
appellees
appellants
lack
standing
challenge
constitutionality
ordinance
original
complaint
action
appellant
richard
pennell
owner
lessor
rental
units
city
san
jose
appellant
apartment
house
owners
association
association
said
unincorporated
association
organized
purpose
representing
interests
owners
lessors
real
property
located
city
san
jose
app
complaint
also
real
property
owned
appellants
subject
terms
ordinance
appellees
point
time
appellants
allege
either
pennell
member
association
hardship
tenants
might
trigger
ordinance
hearing
process
specifically
allege
aggrieved
determination
hearing
officer
certain
proposed
rent
increase
unreasonable
ground
tenant
hardship
appellees
put
point
time
speculative
whether
association
members
injured
fact
ordinance
tenant
hardship
provisions
thus
appellees
contend
appellants
lack
standing
either
test
individual
standing
see
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
individual
standing
requires
actual
injury
redressable
test
associational
standing
see
hunt
washington
apple
advertising
association
standing
behalf
members
members
otherwise
standing
sue
right
must
keep
mind
however
application
constitutional
standing
requirement
mechanical
exercise
allen
wright
standing
challenged
basis
pleadings
accept
true
material
allegations
complaint
construe
complaint
favor
complaining
party
warth
seldin
see
also
gladstone
realtors
village
bellwood
appellants
specifically
alleged
complaint
appellants
properties
subject
terms
ordinance
stated
oral
argument
association
represents
residential
unit
owners
city
many
hardship
tenants
tr
oral
arg
see
also
reply
brief
appellants
accepting
truth
statements
appellees
contest
unadorned
speculation
simon
eastern
kentucky
welfare
rights
organization
conclude
ordinance
enforced
members
association
likelihood
enforcement
concomitant
probability
landlord
rent
reduced
otherwise
able
obtain
absence
ordinance
sufficient
threat
actual
injury
satisfy
art
iii
requirement
plaintiff
challenges
statute
must
demonstrate
realistic
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
statute
operation
enforcement
babbitt
farm
workers
said
recognize
record
case
leaves
much
desired
terms
specificity
purposes
determining
standing
appellants
challenge
ordinance
undoubtedly
least
part
reflection
fact
case
originated
state
art
iii
proscription
advisory
opinions
may
apply
strongly
suggest
future
cases
parties
litigating
circumstances
similar
take
pains
supplement
record
manner
necessary
enable
us
address
much
precision
possible
question
standing
may
raised
turning
merits
first
address
appellants
contention
application
ordinance
tenant
hardship
provisions
violates
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
prohibition
taking
private
property
public
use
without
compensation
essence
appellants
claim
follows
ordinance
establishes
seven
factors
hearing
officer
take
account
determining
reasonable
rent
increase
first
six
factors
objective
related
either
landlord
costs
providing
adequate
rental
unit
condition
rental
market
application
six
standards
results
rent
reasonable
reference
appellants
contend
legitimate
purpose
rent
control
elimination
excessive
rents
caused
san
jose
housing
shortage
hearing
officer
takes
account
hardship
tenant
pursuant
reduces
rent
objectively
reasonable
amount
established
first
six
factors
additional
reduction
rent
increase
constitutes
taking
taking
impermissible
serve
purpose
eliminating
excessive
rents
objective
already
accomplished
considering
first
six
factors
instead
serves
purpose
providing
assistance
hardship
tenants
short
appellants
contend
additional
reduction
rent
grounds
hardship
accomplishes
transfer
landlord
property
individual
hardship
tenants
ordinance
forces
private
individuals
shoulder
public
burden
subsidizing
poor
tenants
housing
appellants
point
axiomatic
fifth
amendment
compensation
provision
designed
bar
government
forcing
people
alone
bear
public
burdens
fairness
justice
borne
public
whole
first
english
evangelical
lutheran
church
glendale
county
los
angeles
quoting
armstrong
think
premature
consider
contention
present
record
things
stand
simply
evidence
tenant
hardship
clause
fact
ever
relied
upon
hearing
officer
reduce
rent
figure
set
basis
factors
set
forth
ordinance
addition
nothing
ordinance
requiring
hearing
officer
fact
reduce
proposed
rent
increase
grounds
tenant
hardship
section
make
mandatory
hardship
considered
hearing
officer
shall
consider
economic
hardship
imposed
present
tenant
goes
state
proposed
increase
constitutes
unreasonably
severe
financial
economic
hardship
may
order
excess
increase
disallowed
emphasis
added
given
essentially
ad
hoc
factual
inquir
involved
takings
analysis
kaiser
aetna
found
particularly
important
takings
cases
adhere
admonition
constitutionality
statutes
decided
except
actual
factual
setting
makes
decision
necessary
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
virginia
surface
mining
example
found
challenge
surface
mining
control
reclamation
act
stat
et
premature
ripe
judicial
resolution
property
owners
case
identified
property
allegedly
taken
act
sought
administrative
relief
act
restrictions
surface
mining
similarly
case
find
mere
fact
hearing
officer
enjoined
consider
hardship
tenant
fixing
landlord
rent
without
showing
particular
case
consequences
injunction
ultimate
determination
rent
present
sufficiently
concrete
factual
setting
adjudication
takings
claim
appellants
raise
cf
cio
mcadory
declining
consider
validity
state
statute
record
show
statute
ever
applied
petitioner
members
appellants
also
urge
mere
provision
ordinance
hearing
officer
may
consider
hardship
tenant
finally
fixing
reasonable
rent
renders
ordinance
facially
invalid
due
process
equal
protection
clauses
even
though
landlord
ever
rent
diminished
much
one
dollar
application
provision
standard
determining
whether
state
regulation
constitutional
due
process
clause
well
established
price
control
unconstitutional
arbitrary
discriminatory
demonstrably
irrelevant
policy
legislature
free
adopt
permian
basin
area
rate
cases
quoting
nebbia
new
york
contexts
recognized
government
may
intervene
marketplace
regulate
rates
prices
artificially
inflated
result
existence
monopoly
near
monopoly
see
fcc
florida
power
approving
limits
rates
charged
cable
companies
access
telephone
poles
fpc
texaco
recognizing
federal
regulation
natural
gas
market
response
threat
monopoly
pricing
discrepancy
supply
demand
market
certain
product
see
nebbia
new
york
supra
allowing
minimum
price
milk
offset
flood
surplus
milk
accordingly
appellants
dispute
ordinance
asserted
purpose
prevent
ing
excessive
unreasonable
rent
increases
caused
growing
shortage
increasing
demand
housing
city
san
jose
legitimate
exercise
appellees
police
powers
cf
block
hirsh
approving
rent
control
washington
basis
congress
finding
housing
city
monopolized
argue
however
arbitrary
discriminatory
demonstrably
irrelevant
permian
basin
area
rate
cases
supra
appellees
attempt
accomplish
additional
goal
reducing
burden
housing
costs
tenants
requiring
hardship
tenant
considered
determining
amount
excess
rent
increase
reasonable
circumstances
pursuant
appellants
put
objective
alleviating
individual
tenant
hardship
policy
legislature
free
adopt
rent
control
ordinance
reply
brief
appellants
reject
contention
however
long
recognized
legitimate
rational
goal
price
rate
regulation
protection
consumer
welfare
see
permian
basin
area
rate
cases
supra
fpc
hope
natural
gas
primary
aim
natural
gas
act
protect
consumers
exploitation
hands
natural
gas
companies
indeed
primary
purpose
rent
control
protection
tenants
see
bowles
willingham
one
purpose
rent
control
protect
persons
relatively
fixed
limited
incomes
consumers
wage
earners
undue
impairment
standard
living
ordinance
establishes
scheme
hearing
officer
considers
number
factors
determining
reasonableness
proposed
rent
increase
exceeds
eight
percent
exceeds
amount
deemed
reasonable
either
first
six
factors
focus
individual
landlord
hearing
officer
examines
history
premises
landlord
costs
market
comparable
housing
section
also
allows
landlord
bring
forth
financial
evidence
including
presumably
evidence
regarding
financial
status
taken
account
hearing
officer
context
ordinance
allows
tenant
hardship
considered
balance
factors
set
within
scheme
represents
rational
attempt
accommodate
conflicting
interests
protecting
tenants
rent
increases
time
ensuring
landlords
guaranteed
fair
return
investment
cf
bowles
willingham
supra
considering
rejecting
contention
rent
control
must
established
landlord
landlord
fashion
utility
rates
accordingly
find
ordinance
carefully
considers
individual
circumstances
landlord
tenant
determining
whether
allow
additional
increase
rent
certain
amounts
deemed
reasonable
face
violate
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
also
find
ordinance
violate
amendment
equal
protection
clause
standard
deferential
appellees
need
show
classification
scheme
embodied
ordinance
rationally
related
legitimate
state
interest
new
orleans
dukes
stated
vance
bradley
overturn
statute
burden
suspect
class
fundamental
interest
unless
varying
treatment
different
groups
persons
unrelated
achievement
combination
legitimate
purposes
conclude
legislature
actions
irrational
light
conclusion
ordinance
tenant
hardship
provisions
designed
serve
legitimate
purpose
protecting
tenants
hardly
conclude
irrational
ordinance
treat
certain
landlords
differently
basis
whether
hardship
tenants
ordinance
distinguishes
landlords
furthers
purpose
ensuring
individual
tenants
suffer
unreasonable
hardship
inconsistent
state
hardship
legitimate
factor
considered
hold
appellees
tailor
ordinance
legitimate
hardship
cases
redressed
cf
woods
cloyd
miller
congress
need
control
rents
none
select
areas
classes
property
need
seems
greatest
recognize
appellants
point
general
difficult
say
landlord
causes
tenant
hardship
beside
point
landlord
hardship
tenant
regardless
reason
rational
appellees
take
fact
consideration
ordinance
establishing
rent
reasonable
circumstances
foregoing
reasons
hold
premature
consider
appellants
claim
takings
clause
reject
facial
challenge
ordinance
due
process
equal
protection
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
judgment
california
accordingly
affirmed
footnotes
ordinance
apply
rent
rent
increases
new
rental
units
first
rented
ordinance
takes
effect
rental
unit
voluntarily
vacated
rental
unit
vacant
result
eviction
certain
specified
acts
cases
also
impose
two
additional
requirements
associational
representational
standing
interests
organization
seeks
protect
must
germane
organization
purpose
hunt
neither
claim
asserted
relief
requested
requires
participation
individual
members
lawsuit
ibid
see
also
automobile
workers
brock
requirements
satisfied
association
organized
purpose
representing
interests
owners
lessors
real
property
san
jose
lawsuit
app
facial
challenge
association
makes
ordinance
require
participation
individual
landlords
appellees
also
argue
pennell
lacks
standing
individually
early
sold
properties
owned
time
complaint
action
filed
see
brief
appellees
declaration
submitted
pennell
admits
sold
properties
recently
repurchased
owns
one
apartment
buildings
san
jose
formerly
owned
declaration
richard
pennell
property
still
subject
ordinance
conclude
association
standing
therefore
jurisdiction
appeal
find
unnecessary
decide
whether
pennell
sale
repurchase
property
affects
standing
reason
also
decline
address
appellants
contention
application
reduce
otherwise
reasonable
rent
increase
basis
tenant
hardship
violates
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
equal
protection
requirements
see
hodel
indiana
dismissing
premature
due
process
challenge
civil
penalty
provision
surface
mining
act
appellees
made
showing
ever
assessed
civil
penalties
act
much
less
statutory
prepayment
requirement
ever
applied
caused
injury
appellants
several
amici
also
argue
ordinance
combination
lower
rents
hardship
tenants
restrictions
landlord
power
evict
tenant
amounts
physical
taking
landlord
property
decline
address
contention
raised
first
time
also
premised
hearing
officer
actually
granting
lower
rent
hardship
tenant
appellants
claim
amici
rent
control
per
se
taking
stated
loretto
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
consistently
affirmed
broad
power
regulate
housing
conditions
general
relationship
particular
without
paying
compensation
economic
injuries
regulation
entails
citing
inter
alia
bowles
willingham
fcc
florida
power
stated
statutes
regulating
economic
relations
landlords
tenants
per
se
takings
despite
amici
urgings
see
need
reconsider
constitutionality
rent
control
per
se
noted
see
supra
extent
appellants
due
process
argument
based
claim
ordinance
forces
landlords
subsidize
individual
tenants
claim
premature
presented
facts
us
consideration
tenant
hardship
also
serves
additional
purpose
stated
face
ordinance
reducing
costs
dislocation
might
otherwise
result
landlords
charge
rents
tenants
afford
particularly
housing
shortage
social
costs
dislocation
tenants
severe
allowing
tenant
hardship
considered
ordinance
enables
appellees
fine
tune
rent
control
take
account
risk
particular
tenant
forced
relocate
result
proposed
rent
increase
justice
scalia
justice
joins
concurring
part
dissenting
part
agree
tenant
hardship
provision
ordinance
face
violate
either
due
process
clause
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
disagree
however
conclusion
appellants
takings
claim
premature
decide
claim
merits
hold
tenant
hardship
provision
ordinance
effects
taking
private
property
without
compensation
violation
fifth
fourteenth
amendments
appellants
contend
application
tenant
hardship
provision
san
jose
ordinance
effect
uncompensated
taking
private
property
provision
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interests
improperly
imposes
public
burden
individual
landlords
understand
claim
law
applicable
plaintiffs
root
branch
invalid
readily
rejected
merits
merely
noting
least
applications
may
lawful
understand
claim
possibly
avoided
considering
premature
suppose
example
feature
rental
ordinance
attack
provision
allowing
hearing
officer
consider
race
apartment
owner
deciding
whether
allow
rent
increase
inconceivable
say
judicial
challenge
must
await
demonstration
provision
actually
applied
detriment
one
plaintiffs
difference
seems
facial
challenge
rests
upon
takings
clause
rather
equal
protection
clause
confuses
issue
relying
cases
portions
cases
takings
clause
challenge
law
applications
took
property
without
compensation
rather
law
application
regulating
use
particular
property
severely
reduced
value
property
constitute
taking
context
suggests
generally
takings
analysis
involves
essentially
ad
hoc
factual
inquir
kaiser
aetna
said
much
less
year
ago
surprising
soon
forgotten
addressing
petitioners
claim
must
disregard
posture
case
comes
us
district
granted
summary
judgment
respondents
facial
challenge
subsidence
act
explained
question
whether
mere
enactment
statutes
regulations
constitutes
taking
posture
case
critical
recognized
important
distinction
claim
mere
enactment
statute
constitutes
taking
claim
particular
impact
government
action
specific
piece
property
requires
payment
compensation
point
illustrated
decision
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
rejected
preenforcement
challenge
constitutionality
surface
mining
control
reclamation
act
explained
appellees
taking
claim
arose
context
facial
challenge
presented
concrete
controversy
concerning
either
application
act
particular
surface
mining
operations
effect
specific
parcels
land
thus
issue
properly
district
turn
whether
mere
enactment
surface
mining
act
constitutes
taking
test
applied
considering
facial
challenge
straightforward
statute
regulating
uses
made
property
effects
taking
denies
owner
economically
viable
use
land
petitioners
thus
face
uphill
battle
making
facial
attack
act
taking
keystone
bituminous
coal
assn
debenedictis
true
facial
takings
challenge
hodel
virginia
surface
mining
reclamation
supra
remarkable
point
case
support
position
describing
holding
follows
virginia
surface
mining
example
found
challenge
surface
mining
control
reclamation
act
premature
ripe
judicial
resolution
property
owners
case
identified
property
allegedly
taken
act
sought
administrative
relief
act
restrictions
surface
mining
ante
thus
issue
properly
district
turn
whether
mere
enactment
surface
mining
act
constitutes
taking
sum
entirely
clear
cases
facial
takings
challenge
premature
even
rests
upon
ground
ordinance
deprives
property
owners
economically
viable
use
land
ground
said
easier
establish
attack
possible
even
clear
present
facial
challenge
premature
rest
upon
ground
even
profit
consideration
context
particular
application
said
agins
zoning
law
effects
taking
ordinance
substantially
advance
legitimate
state
interests
denies
owner
economically
viable
use
land
present
challenge
former
sort
appellants
contend
providing
financial
assistance
impecunious
renters
state
interest
legitimately
furthered
regulating
use
property
knowing
nature
character
particular
property
question
degree
economic
impairment
way
assist
inquiry
factors
irrelevent
present
claim
said
claim
law
effects
taking
authorizing
permanent
physical
invasion
property
see
loretto
teleprompter
manhattan
catv
even
explicitly
overrule
cases
agins
virginia
surface
mining
keystone
hold
facial
challenge
lie
issue
forcefully
presented
attack
still
reason
present
challenge
proceed
today
holding
basis
equity
precedent
since
san
jose
ordinance
require
specification
much
reduction
rent
attributable
various
factors
hearing
officer
allowed
take
account
quite
possible
none
many
landlords
affected
ordinance
ever
able
meet
requirement
showing
particular
case
consequences
hardship
factor
ultimate
determination
rent
ante
reason
thus
shield
alleged
constitutional
injustice
judicial
scrutiny
therefore
consider
appellants
takings
claim
merits
ii
fifth
amendment
constitution
made
applicable
fourteenth
amendment
chicago
chicago
provides
private
property
shall
taken
public
use
without
compensation
repeatedly
observed
purpose
provision
bar
government
forcing
people
alone
bear
public
burdens
fairness
justice
borne
public
whole
armstrong
see
also
first
english
evangelical
lutheran
church
glendale
los
angeles
county
webb
fabulous
pharmacies
beckwith
agins
tiburon
supra
penn
central
transportation
new
york
city
monongahela
navigation
traditional
regulation
short
totally
destroys
economic
value
property
violate
principle
relationship
property
use
restricted
regulation
social
evil
regulation
seeks
remedy
since
owner
use
property
regulation
source
social
problem
said
singled
unfairly
thus
common
zoning
regulations
requiring
subdividers
observe
restrictions
dedicate
certain
areas
public
streets
accord
constitutional
traditions
proposed
property
use
otherwise
cause
excessive
congestion
relationship
popularly
thought
justify
emergency
price
regulation
commodities
priced
level
produces
exorbitant
returns
owners
commodities
viewed
responsible
economic
hardship
occurs
whether
accurate
perception
way
economy
operates
least
true
owners
reap
unique
benefits
situation
produces
economic
hardship
respect
singling
relieve
may
regarded
unfair
justification
might
apply
rent
regulation
present
case
apart
single
feature
attack
appellants
contest
validity
rent
regulation
general
acknowledge
city
may
constitutionally
set
reasonable
rent
according
statutory
minimum
six
factors
must
considered
hearing
officer
cost
debt
servicing
rental
history
unit
physical
condition
unit
changes
housing
services
financial
information
provided
landlord
market
value
rents
similar
units
san
jose
municipal
ordinance
appellants
claim
reduction
rent
increase
otherwise
reasonable
rent
scheme
may
consistently
constitution
based
consideration
seventh
factor
hardship
tenant
defined
think
right
six
factors
ordinance
applied
landlord
property
receiving
reasonable
return
longer
regarded
cause
exorbitantly
priced
housing
longer
reaping
distinctively
high
profits
housing
shortage
seventh
factor
hardship
provision
invoked
meet
quite
different
social
problem
existence
renters
poor
afford
even
reasonably
priced
housing
problem
caused
exploited
landlords
grocers
sell
needy
renters
food
department
stores
sell
clothes
employers
pay
wages
citizens
san
jose
holding
higher
paying
jobs
excluded
even
neediness
renters
regarded
problem
distinctively
attributable
landlords
general
remotely
attributable
particular
landlords
ordinance
singles
namely
happen
hardship
tenant
present
time
may
happen
rent
hardship
tenant
future
whose
current
future
affluent
tenants
may
happen
decline
hardship
category
traditional
manner
american
government
met
problem
pay
reasonable
prices
privately
sold
necessities
problem
caused
society
large
distribution
persons
funds
raised
public
large
taxes
either
cash
welfare
payments
goods
public
housing
publicly
subsidized
housing
food
stamps
unless
abandon
guiding
principle
takings
clause
public
burdens
borne
public
whole
armstrong
manner
constitution
permits
fact
government
acts
relationship
magically
transform
general
public
welfare
must
supported
public
mere
economic
regulation
disproportionately
burden
particular
individuals
city
regulating
rents
relevant
sense
preventing
rents
excessive
rather
using
occasion
rent
regulation
accomplished
rest
ordinance
establish
welfare
program
privately
funded
landlords
happen
hardship
tenants
course
economic
regulation
effects
wealth
transfer
excessive
rents
forbidden
example
landlords
class
become
poorer
tenants
class
least
incumbent
tenants
class
become
richer
singling
landlords
transferors
may
within
traditional
constitutional
notions
fairness
plausibly
regarded
source
beneficiary
problem
connection
longer
required
however
end
social
transformations
accomplished
regulation
great
expense
democratic
process
politically
attractive
feature
regulation
permits
wealth
transfers
achieved
achieved
otherwise
rather
permits
achieved
budget
relative
invisibility
thus
relative
immunity
normal
democratic
processes
san
jose
might
example
accomplished
something
like
result
simply
raising
real
estate
tax
upon
rental
properties
using
additional
revenues
thus
acquired
pay
part
rents
hardship
tenants
seems
doubtful
however
whether
citizens
san
jose
allow
funds
municipal
treasury
wherever
derived
distributed
family
four
income
high
year
generous
maximum
necessary
qualify
automatically
hardship
tenant
rental
ordinance
voters
might
well
see
pressing
social
priorities
course
renters
acquire
spurious
regulation
groups
acquire
well
door
opened
unreasonable
expect
price
regulations
requiring
private
businesses
give
special
discounts
senior
citizens
matter
affluent
students
handicapped
war
veterans
subsidies
groups
may
well
good
idea
operation
takings
clause
governmental
system
required
applied
general
process
taxing
spending
economic
effects
competing
priorities
evident
fostering
intelligent
democratic
process
one
happy
effects
constitutional
prescription
perhaps
accidental
perhaps
essence
however
simply
unfairness
making
one
citizen
pay
fashion
taxes
remedy
social
problem
none
creation
new
jersey
said
finding
unconstitutional
scheme
displaying
among
defects
vice
find
dispositive
legislative
category
economically
needy
senior
citizens
sound
proper
sustainable
rational
classification
compelled
subsidization
landlords
tenants
happen
live
apartment
building
senior
citizens
improper
unconstitutional
method
solving
problem
property
owners
assn
north
bergen
san
jose
ordinance
hardship
tenants
include
though
limited
whose
household
income
monthly
housing
expense
meets
sic
criteria
assistance
existing
housing
provisions
housing
community
development
act
ed
supp
iii
department
housing
urban
development
currently
limits
assistance
provisions
families
four
san
jose
area
earn
less
per
year
memorandum
dept
housing
urban
development
assistant
secretary
housing
income
limits
lower
income
families
housing
act