HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5.1 HAC Staff RPT TenantProtections
P a g e | 1
City of Chula Vista Boards & Commissions
Housing Advisory Commission
January 31, 2021 Item: 5.1
TITLE
Tenancy Protections: Consideration of Recommending Adding a Proposed Residential Landlord and Tenant
Ordinance to the Chula Vista Municipal Code
Location: No specific geographic location
Department: Development Services
Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California
Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no
environmental review is required.
Recommended Action
Commission discuss the proposed ordinance and provide recommended action to City Council.
SUMMARY
With the expiration of California’s COVID-19 related eviction moratorium in September 2021, several
tenants’ rights groups began advocating for stronger tenant eviction protections from local governments
across the state. In response to reports of tenant harassment and some evictions within Chula Vista, the
Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (“ACCE”) approached the City of Chula Vista
requesting consideration of a more stringent local ordinance to provide tenant protections, resulting in a City
Council referral on October 26, 2021. This item provides a proposed ordinance, for discussion, to address the
referral and provide an additional landlord and tenant ordinance in the City of Chula Vista (the “Proposed
Ordinance”).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activity for compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the activity is not a “Project” as defined under
Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will not result in a physical change in the environment;
therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA.
Thus, no environmental review is required.
P a g e | 2
DISCUSSION
Council Referral
After several months of public comments specific to the eviction of tenants at two properties in the City of
Chula Vista and requests by ACCE, during the October 26, 2021 meeting City Council provided staff with a
referral to review and address the following key areas of tenant protection law:
• Substantial rehabilitation
• Removal from rental market
• Harassment/Retaliation
• City Remedies & Enforcement
Staff developed a process for addressing the referral as depicted in Exhibit 1.
Exhibit 1
Tenant Protection Referral Timeline
Fact Finding
Landlord and tenant rights around termination of tenancy in the City of Chula Vista currently rely on existing
California state laws as detailed below:
• The Ellis Act (1985) allows landlords to remove units from the rental market. Requires 120-day
notices for residents or 365-days for elderly and disabled residents in rent control jurisdictions. It
also allows local jurisdictions to enact more measures to mitigate the impacts on withdrawal of rental
units from the market.
• Civil Code 1942.5 (1988) prohibits retaliatory evictions.
• Assembly Bill 1482 (AB-1482) California Tenant Protection Act (2019) established Civil Code
Section 1946.2 prohibiting evictions without legally defined reasons (“just cause”). It also established
Civil Code Section 1947.12 which prohibits increasing rent more than the Consumer Price Index
(“CPI”) plus five percent (up to a maximum of ten percent).
P a g e | 3
In California, over 30 jurisdictions have adopted local ordinances providing tenant protections above and
beyond state requirements. These ordinances are primarily focused in three areas: 1) Just Cause ordinances
defining more specific regulations for sanctioned evictions including displacement requirements, tenant
relocation assistance, and a tenant’s first right of refusal for rental units reintroduced to the market in
addition to those specified in Civil Code 1946.2; 2) Additional Ellis Act provisions requiring longer noticing
periods and greater relocation assistance; and 3) Anti-Harassment ordinances that further define what can
be considered inappropriate retaliation from landlords and specify behaviors that are considered tenant
harassment. Local tenant protection ordinances vary widely across the state and can have major financial
ramifications for both landlords and tenants. Example ordinances are summarized in a comparison matrix
in Attachment 1.
Data Related to Evictions in the City of Chula Vista
Due to the adoption of AB-1482 in 2019 and the succeeding COVID-19 pandemic-related eviction
moratoriums, the true impacts of the legislation are relatively unknown. However, advocates are concerned
that without additional local protections for known gaps in state law, tenants could remain susceptible to no
cause evictions.
According to the City of Chula Vista’s Fair Housing Provider, CSA San Diego, between July 2015 and June
2018, nearly 800 calls from Chula Vista residents were received. Of those, approximately 30% were related
to notices to vacate or evictions. Another 8% reported some type of discrimination, harassment or retaliation
and 22% on average indicated that they had rental issues that related to but not limited to rental increases,
illegal entry, quiet enjoyment, and property or lease issues, as summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
CSA San Diego Tenant/Landlord Calls (Fiscal Years 2015-2018)
2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 TOTAL FOR PERIOD
Total Clients Served 260 275 257 792
Call Issue Calls % of total Calls % of total Calls % of total TOTAL/AVERAGE%
Discrimination 9 3% 9 3% 6 2% 24/3%
Notice to Vacate 77 30% 76 28% 62 24% 215/27%
Evictions 5 2% 10 4% 12 5% 27/3%
Harassment 6 2% 8 3% 20 8% 34/4%
Retaliation 3 1% 0 0% 1 0% 4/1%
Rental Issues 49 19% 61 22% 67 26% 177/22%
All other Issues 111 43% 111 40% 89 35% 311/39%
In the past five years, according to City building records, less than 70 multi-family market rate properties
have undergone substantial rehabilitation (major structural or electrical improvements) that may have
P a g e | 4
required tenants to vacate while work was completed. While it is unknown whether any of these resulted in
evictions to tenants, the City of Chula Vista recognizes that the aging housing stock will necessitate additional
renovations in the near future, particularly in western Chula Vista. According to the 2018 U.S. Census
American Community Survey, 48% of the City of Chula Vista’s housing stock is over 40 years of age. Adoption
of additional local tenant protections in the City of Chula Vista would provide an additional tool for tenants
who may be impacted by such revitalization.
Stakeholder Outreach
In addition to the HAC meeting on 12/8/21, the following groups met with City staff in early December 2021
and/or January 2022 to provide feedback on concepts and the draft ordinance:
• Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE);
• California Apartment Association (CAA);
• Pacific Southwest Association of Realtors (PSAR);
• San Diego Association of Realtors (SDAR);
• Southern California Rental Housing Association (SCRHA); and
• Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association (WMA).
Table 2 provides a summary of the input received from the stakeholder feedback. The feedback is divided
into four categories: the need for a local ordinance; comments specific to the concepts presented in December
2021; alternative means to address tenant protection; and the draft ordinance as presented in early January
2022.
Table 2
Stakeholder Input Received
Local Ordinance
Needed Not Needed
• Prevent statewide eviction trends.
• Eliminate loopholes in state law.
• Pro-active vs. reactive approach to non-
compliant landlords.
• Establish first-right-of-refusal to return to unit.
• Greater tenant harassment protections.
• Reactive without demonstrated need.
• State law is adequate.
• Unintended consequences:
o Impact to other tenants; and
o Disincentivizing development/remodels.
• Creating loopholes for non-compliant tenants.
Concepts (December 2021)
Ellis Act
• Relocation should be tied to economics or fixed amounts.
No Cause
• Defining substantial rehabilitation is desirable but do not identify permit threshold.
• Include first right of refusal to return but further work on rental rate on return.
Alternatives
• Education (Tenants and Landlords).
• City enforcement for business license re-issuance.
• Using statewide industry partners for tenant defense.
• Dispute Resolution/Mediation
Draft Ordinance (January 2022)
• Ordinance should acknowledge landlord rights.
• The number and scope of the harassment definitions too broad.
P a g e | 5
• Just-Cause provisions should apply on day one of tenancy.
• Relocation assistance payments needed to be rewritten to match industry practices (e.g., using one
check for all tenants).
• Landlords need to be able to terminate tenancy based on substantial remodel. This can be
accomplished in a way that minimizes harm to tenants.
• This will expose landlords to excessive litigation.
• The ordinance is too biased towards tenants.
• Consider whether appropriate to apply to mobile home renter.
Proposed Ordinance
The Proposed Ordinance, Attachment 2, incorporates input received by all stakeholders and addresses the
Council referral, by complying with state law and providing additional protections as summarized below.
Attachment 2 has been provided in track changes to identify updates made since the 1/19/22 published
version.
• Just Cause Terminations of Tenancy
o Consistent with Civil Code Section 1946.2;
o Covers day one of tenancy;
o Increased noticing requirements of 120 days or 365 days for elderly/disabled for no fault
terminations based on withdrawal from the rental market, complete demolition or
substantial remodel;
o Defines substantial remodel;
o Relocation assistance equivalent to 2 months of the HUD published Small Area Fair Market
Rent (HUD SAFMR) for no fault terminations based on withdrawal from the rental market,
complete demolition or substantial remodel; and
o Notice and relocation assistance requirements for remodels where there is no termination of
tenancy, but the tenant will need to temporarily vacate; and
o Additional tenant protections that are not prohibited by any other provision of law.
• Anti-Harassment/Retaliation
o Expands definition of harassment and retaliation behaviors.
• Remedies and City Enforcement
o Specifies both City enforcement measures and private Tenant remedies; and
o Includes a provision for required education, mediation, and alternative dispute resolution.
Remaining Issues for Discussion
While staff has presented recommendations in the Proposed Ordinance, staff encourages Commission
direction related to the overall ordinance. For context and discussion purposes, additional information is
being provided related to relocation assistance, as follows:
Staff selected and evaluated options based on the following criteria:
o Benefits that do not penalize a tenant for a lower rent base and allow re-entry into the rental market; and
o Data set that is:
• Readily available;
• Not overly complex;
• Updated at least annually; and
• Geographically representative.
P a g e | 6
The following were considered in preparation of the Draft Ordinance:
o Existing rental rate;
o HUD Fair Market Rent (FMR);
o HUD Small Area FMR (SAFMR); and
o California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) rents.
Staff has recommended the HUD SAFMR since it meets the most criteria and provides a figure based on zip
code rather than averages.
Conclusion
Stakeholders agreed that some areas of state law are not clearly defined, and local jurisdictions can provide
greater clarity to help both landlords and tenants. They also concurred that greater education is needed for
both groups. Each April, the City of Chula Vista participates in regional efforts related to Fair Housing month.
These include, but are not limited to, facilitating outreach events/trainings to tenants and property
managers, in concert with our contracted Fair Housing provider. Beginning in 2022, the Ci ty’s Fair Housing
provider will be required to hold a minimum of three training events for landlords and a variety of additional
tenant education efforts in order to meet goals in the City’s Housing Element and ensure public awareness
of laws specific to the City of Chula Vista.
A Proposed Ordinance will provide greater tenant protections within the City of Chula Vista by establishing
additional noticing and relocation assistance requirements; providing expanded definitions of harassing and
retaliatory behaviors; authorizing both City and Tenant enforcement mechanisms; and providing tenants
and landlords with additional tools to resolve and prevent disputes. Staff intend to continue working with
stakeholders to refine the provisions based on input received at this meeting and take forward a proposed
final version to City Council in February.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not a site- specific
and consequently, the real property holdings of the Housing Advisory Commission members do not create a
disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov’t
Code §87100, et seq.).
CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
The approval of this resolution will not impact the General Fund.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
There is no anticipated ongoing fiscal impact to the General Fund as a result of this action.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Comparison of Local Regulations
2. Proposed CVMC Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance (Draft for Discussion as of 1/25/22)
3. Correspondence Received for Cancelled 1/19/22 Housing Advisory Commission Meeting
Staff Contact: Stacey Kurz, Housing Manager