Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.
Sign up for our Public Policy newsletter
You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:
Thank You!
Law360 (April 27, 2020, 5:11 PM EDT) -- The city of Norwalk on Friday denied that it was attempting to block the California governor's emergency order on housing the homeless during the coronavirus pandemic, after Los Angeles County filed a lawsuit claiming the city was illegally interfering with its efforts to follow the order.
The county's complaint was filed Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court along with a petition for a writ of mandate and request for a temporary restraining order. The county said that while many cities, hotels and motels have "jumped in" to help implement Project Roomkey to help the homeless, Norwalk has obstructed those efforts.
Norwalk's response to the restraining order request said it has not attempted "to hinder, block, or otherwise impede" the project but that an ordinance passed last week by the city council requiring review of any contracts under the program is consistent with Project Roomkey.
"The county of Los Angeles is not the only public entity 'facing an unprecedented public health crisis,' nor is the county alone in its efforts to combat COVID-19 and the long-standing homeless crisis in the state," Norwalk said. "The city has declared its own 'local emergency' in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and it cannot responsibly address its local crisis if the county refuses to coordinate — or at least advise — the city of significant county-level actions having dramatic impacts on city residents."
On April 3, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Project Roomkey, a program intended to provide noncommunal shelter for "high risk" homeless individuals who are over 65 or have underlying health problems that make them vulnerable to COVID-19, the county said in its Thursday TRO request.
The project fell under the umbrella of Newsom's March 4 state of emergency order and related executive order on March 12, according the TRO request.
On Tuesday, Norwalk sent a cease and desist letter to a hotel participating in Project Roomkey and threatened the business with legal action if it did not immediately withdraw from a contract it had entered into with the county, according to the TRO request.
"Norwalk did not stop there," the county said, adding that on the same day the city council passed an ordinance that bars hotels and motels from "converting or utilizing businesses or properties" for homeless housing or COVID-19 housing uses or purposes "without prior city approval," the county said.
The interference from Norwalk is a violation of state law, which under the California Emergency Services Act requires counties and cities to carry out the governor's emergency plans, the county said.
"Those plans include Project Roomkey, along with other programs designed to bring vulnerable individuals experiencing homelessness indoors, and provide medical testing and social distancing and quarantine measures as necessary, to minimize COVID-19 exposure risks," the county said in its TRO request.
In the complaint, the county is seeking declaratory relief, and the TRO includes a request for the court to order Norwalk to comply with the emergency declaration and executive order, and prevent the city from blocking businesses from participating in Project Roomkey.
Norwalk's response said the state's "fact sheet" on the program requires counties to "closely coordinate [their efforts] with applicable local partners, including cities," but that the county had plowed ahead with plans without first informing the city.
"Instead, without regard to local authority or concern, the county has in the city of Norwalk proceeded by: contracting with a local hotel first, advising the city after the fact, failing or refusing to provide operating information about the proposal, and finally suing the city in response to its efforts to compel the county to 'give it a seat at the table,'" Norwalk said.
The city added that the hotel site it sent the letter to on Tuesday is not suitable for the program, including because it is within 200-300 feet of single-family residential tracks, and within a half-mile of two public schools.
Counsel for Norwalk and the county did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Los Angeles County is represented by Mary C. Wickham, Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, Thomas J. Faughnan and Lauren M. Black of the Office of the Los Angeles County Counsel, and attorneys with Miller Barondess LLP.
Norwalk is represented by Arnold M. Alvarez-Glasman of Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin.
The case is County of Los Angeles v. City of Norwalk, case number 20STCP01480, in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
--Editing by Amy Rowe.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
