> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # A house divided, a court unanimous - URL: https://www.smdp.com/a-house-divided-a-court-unanimous/ - Published: 2008-05-29T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T19:43:48.000Z - Author: Guest Author - Tags: Crime, Ocean Park, #archive-import, Homeless *Apartment building to be demolished* *By ALICE OLLSTEIN Special to the Daily Press* OCEAN PARK The California Supreme Court ruled recently to end a decade-long legal battle against Santa Monica landlord Guillermo Gonzalez, whose multi-unit apartment building is slated to be demolished due to severe health and safety code violations. The case will now be sent back to the lower trial court in Beverly Hills sometime in the near future to work out the details of the case. Gonzalez, who owns the three-unit property at 2438 Ocean Park Boulevard, has been hounded by the City of Santa Monica since 1989, when City Hall filed a civil nuisance lawsuit alleging violations of building, fire, mechanical, plumbing and electrical codes. In 1991, City Hall demolished sections of the building that had been constructed without permits to the tune of $21,900, which Gonzalez was forced to pay by refinancing his mortgage. “They’ve been robbing me since I moved here,” said Gonzalez.“I’m lucky I’m still here now, because I’ve got no place else to go.” Later, in 1997, City Hall filed an 85-count misdemeanor criminal complaint against Gonzalez for further code violations. He pled guilty to 15 counts and served 280 days in jail. Between 2001 and 2004, the property failed repeated city inspections, and on Dec. 6, 2004, City Hall filed to appoint a receiver for the building. The inspectors found that a single bedroom on the second floor contained seven bunk beds being individually rented by the week. Further complaints included an exterior overrun with flammable garbage, a lack of heating in all units, extension cords used in place of proper electrical wiring and, most notably, reports from neighbors of chronic criminal activity. While Adam Radinsky, the head of the Consumer Production Unit for City Hall, would not characterize the property as a slum, he did refer to it as “a place that had a lot of serious problems for many years and an owner who refused to correct them.” As a final measure, City Hall appointed Century City attorney David Pasternak as the receiver for the facility. “We are glad that California cities will keep this important tool for dealing with the most problematic properties, although it is a tool of last resort,” Radinsky said. “When you have building owners who refuse to build up to code, you have to protect right of tenants to live in safe and sanitary conditions.” In 2005, Pasternak requested permission to demolish the building, noting that a vacant lot would be easier and more profitable to sell than an unsafe structure. In fact, he estimated that demolition would yield $59,000 more in revenue. According to his attorney Stanley Stern, Gonzalez submitted a petition to the Supreme Court claiming that his right to due process of law and his property rights guaranteed under the California Constitution had been violated. According to the court record, Gonzalez informed the court that he opposed demolition and that it was his “fervent wish” to be permitted to continue inhabiting the property with his family. Gonzalez stated on record that apart from the rents received from the property, he was unemployed and had no other income or assets. He also claims not to have received proper notification of the appointed receiver. “The city misdirects the owners on purpose so that you lose your property,” Gonzalez said. “One inspector said that everything was up to code in 1980, and 30 years later they tell me it’s not up to code. They contradict each other. They have no social skills, no communication skills and they have no class. All they have is evil minds.” The court did not agree. “This is an egregious case where \[Gonzalez\] has been involved in criminal matters and numerous civil matters regarding the conduct and condition of this property,” the state Supreme Court ruled. “He certainly had more than ample notice of the building code violations and the other safety code violations that are existent on his property.” Gonzalez still contends that City Hall mistreated him. This is the first Supreme Court to address the receivership law. Radinsky noted that while what he calls “the receivership remedy” is not used extensively, use has been increasing. “We have talked with law enforcement officials and they say it’s prevalent,” he said. “It’s a chronic problem.” He hopes that the ruling will send a message to property owners throughout California. “We hope that property owners will keep their properties up to code so cities don’t have to go this far,” Radinsky said. Gonzalez was born in Texas and raised on the U.S./Mexico border. Growing up, he crossed the border every day for work. After being homeless for several years in the late 1960s, he started making a name for himself in boxing, sometimes earning up to $15,000 a night, he said. In 1973 he put his newfound fortune into buying the Ocean Park property. “I wanted to help myself and help others,” Gonzalez said. “I have a family and roommates here and they help me pay the bills. It’s so hard to find a job right now, so we all share expenses. I would love to have everyone live in my house, but I can only help so many people.” In their final opinion, the court wrote: “Even if the property were rehabilitated and returned to Gonzalez’s control, the uncontroverted facts presented an overwhelming inference that Gonzalez did not have the economic means and the moral resolve to function as a responsible property owner so as to avoid once again endangering the health and safety of his family, potential tenants and neighbors.” ![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/55/9f/559f9abc-8372-4a2e-8c2d-27386da4e363/content/images/2026/10/052908-05_01.jpg) (Photo: Special to the Daily Press) *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 29, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/052908.pdf?ref=smdp.com)