HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1 - Emergency Ordinance Approving Just Cause Protections and Rental Increase Limits
Department Name: Administration
Cost Center: 1001
For Agenda of: November 26, 2019
Placement: 1
Estimated Time: 60 minutes
FROM: Derek Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: EMERGENCY ORDINANCE – APPROVING JUST CAUSE PROTECTIONS
AND RENTAL INCREASE LIMITS
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Review and consider public correspondence and testimony related to AB 1482 (Attachment A;
and
2. Consider adoption of an Emergency Ordinance approving “just cause” protections and rental
increase limits to be in effect immediately upon introduction and adoption, until January 1, 2020
(Attachment B).
DISCUSSION
On September 11, 2019, the State Legislature passed AB 1482 placing limits on the amount a
landlord may raise rents within any 12-month period and establishing “just cause” eviction
protections. The bill was signed by Governor Newsom on October 8, 2019 and goes into effect
on January 1, 2020. Since the last City Council meeting, San Luis Obispo residents have
submitted email correspondence (Attachment A) that asserts they are experiencing tenancy
actions that may be prohibited under AB 1482, specifically that notices of rent increases and/or
terminations of tenancies are occurring in the City in the interim period prior to the effective date
of the state law. The Council could rely on these reports by City residents, if the Council
determines them to be persuasive, in order to reach a conclusion that there is a real and imminent
threat to the public health, safety and welfare associated with community members experiencing
putative rent increases or evictions, warranting immediate legislative action. Such findings by the
Council are entitled to deference.
San Luis Obispo does not currently require “just cause” for the termination of any residential
tenancy and the just cause provisions enacted in AB 1482 will not go into effect until January 1,
2020. Residents have requested that the Council adopt an emergency ordinance to put into
place “just cause” requirements that would protect tenants until the AB 1482 takes effect. After
receiving email correspondence this past week and weekend, a majority of Council Members
requested that a special meeting be held as soon as is practical.
Packet Page 1
Item 1
The emergency ordinance for the Council’s consideration (Attachment B) includes the
enactment of emergency “just cause” provisions and adoption of rent limits consistent with
those imposed by AB 1482 in the period between adoption of the proposed ordinance until the
protections of state law become effective January 1, 2020. The provisions allow for eviction
when the tenant is “at fault” (the tenant has breached the terms of the lease or engaged in other
misconduct) and for circumstances where there is “no fault” such as where the landlord wants to
move into the unit.
The rent increase limits also track the provisions of AB 1482 and would limit the amount of rent
increases that can be imposed to the amount allowed under the AB 1482 formula (change in CPI
+ 5%, but no more than 10%). AB 1482 includes a rent roll back provision whereby the limits
established in the bill apply to any rent increases imposed after March 15, 2019. If between this
date and the end of this year a landlord increases rents in an amount that would have exceeded
the cap imposed by AB 1482 if it had been in effect during that time, the rents will be rolled back
to the maximum amount that would have been allowed. However, the bill also provides that the
landlord will not be liable for “overpayment,” which appears to mean that there is no right to
recover rent increases charged in the period between March and January 1, but any increase that
was imposed in violation of that prohibition would be rolled back as of January 1. The
disincentive to prohibited rent increases may be the administrative burden of implementing and
unwinding prohibited increases in the approximately eight-and-a-half-month period established.
The proposed ordinance is presented as an emergency ordinance pursuant to Article VI, Section
6051 of the City’s Charter which allows for an emergency/urgency ordinance to be adopted on
the first reading and requires approval by “a four-fifths vote of the Council including a
declaration for the basis of the emergency.” If the ordinance is approved, it will go into effect
immediately and end on January 1, 2020 when AB 1482 goes into effect.
For the Council’s information, several California cities including Grover Beach, Los Angeles,
San Mateo, Redwood City, Daly City, Milpitas, and others have adopted emergency ordinances
establishing protections during the gap period before AB 1482 goes into effect. Some cities such
as San Mateo and Redwood City have adopted an ordinance containing just cause protections
and rent increase limits while other cities such as Daly City, Milpitas, and Los Angeles have
adopted ordinances only establishing just cause protections.
Policy Context
The City Council adopted Housing as a Major City Goal for the 2019-21 Financial Plan and this
action is consistent with the focus and tasks included in the workplan.
1 Section 605.Emergency Legislation.
Any ordinance declared by the Council to be necessary as an emergency measure, for preserving the public peace,
health or safety, and containing a statement of the reasons for its urgency, may be introduced and adopted at once at
the same meeting if passed by at least four (4) affirmative votes.
Packet Page 2
Item 1
Public Engagement
City staff have contacted the San Luis Obispo Realtor’s Association, Home Builders
Association, and posted information on the City’s website and social media in addition to
fielding questions from the media. Because of the urgent nature of the issue and the timing of
receiving information from the public; public outreach such as workshops, meetings, or other
methods have not be used so that the Council could consider an ordinance that would provide the
intended protections in the policy “time gap” before AB 1482 takes effect.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of this emergency ordinance is exempt from compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3), as it
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the ordinance may have a
significant effect on the environment. The ordinance will be of limited duration, will only apply
to existing residential housing units and will be uncodified or unpublished.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff does not anticipate that the approval of the emergency ordinance will have a budget impact.
The “just cause” provision provides a defense to any eviction action that may be brought against
a tenant without just cause, and the rent increase limit provisions establish a private right for a
tenant to sue to recover any excessive rent paid. The provisions of this ordinance will not be
directly enforced by the City so there will not be implementation costs.
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council has the following alternatives to consider:
1. Consider public testimony and decline to adopt an emergency ordinance.
2. Confer with staff and revise the emergency ordinance to reflect any policy changes to
respond to Council direction and community input.
3. Continue the matter to a future meeting date and time.
Attachments:
b - Ordinance
a - Public Correspondence
Packet Page 3
Item 1
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Page 4
Item 1
From: >
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2019 7:38 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Subject: emergency rent caps
Honorable Council Members,
Earlier this year, Governor Newsom signed AB 1482 into law, which caps rent increases at 5% plus
inflation and protects tenants from unjust evictions. I am pleased that the state government is
recognizing the needs of tenants in the midst of our housing shortage, but during this interim period,
it appears that tenants and families across SLO County have been experiencing many of these unjust
rent increases and evictions the law is meant to prevent. This loophole period leaves our neighbors
vulnerable to the whims of bad landlords just as the holiday season begins. No one should be
spending this time of year worrying about how they will be able to buy gifts for their families and put
a meal on the table AND pay increased rent. I am asking the council to pass an emergency ordinance
that prohibits all new evictions and rent increases for the weeks before AS 1482 takes effect. It's
urgent that we can do this to protect our own residents in the face of this historic housing crisis. Los
Angeles, Bell Gardens, and Inglewood have passed ordinances like these in recent days, and I think
the cities of SLO County should do the same.
Sincerely,
Cathryn Sells
724 Mentone Ave.
Grover Beach
805-4 73-3880
csel ls@cha rter. net
Packet Page 5
Item 1
Tonikian, Victoria
From:csells@charter.net
Sent:20198:49PM
To:E-mailCouncilWebsite
Subject:FW: emergencyrentcaps
HonorableCouncilMembers,
Iamwriting toapologize fortheemailbelow. ItwasbroughttomyattentionbyAndyPeasethatAB1482containsa
clausethat coversthe periodfrom March15, 2019, untilthebill takeseffect onJanuary1, 2020. I missedthatwhen I
hastilyreadoverthebillorIwouldnothavewasted yourtimewithmyemail.
Please forgiveme; Iwillbemorediligentinthefuture.
Sincerely,
Cathryn Sells
From:
To: "emailcouncil@slocity.org"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday October31 20197:38:01PM
Subject: emergencyrentcaps
HonorableCouncilMembers,
Earlierthis year, GovernorNewsomsignedAB1482into law, whichcaps rentincreases at5% plus
inflationandprotects tenantsfromunjust evictions. Iam pleasedthatthestategovernment is
recognizingtheneedsoftenantsinthemidstofourhousingshortage, butduringthisinterimperiod,
itappearsthattenantsandfamiliesacrossSLOCountyhavebeenexperiencing manyoftheseunjust
rentincreases andevictionsthe lawismeant toprevent. Thisloopholeperiodleaves ourneighbors
vulnerabletothewhimsofbadlandlordsjustastheholidayseasonbegins. Nooneshouldbe
spendingthistimeofyearworryingabouthowtheywillbeabletobuygiftsfortheirfamiliesandput
amealonthetableANDpayincreasedrent. Iamasking thecounciltopassanemergency ordinance
thatprohibits allnewevictionsandrentincreasesfortheweeksbeforeAS1482takeseffect. It’s
urgentthatwecandothistoprotectourownresidentsinthefaceofthishistorichousingcrisis. Los
Angeles, BellGardens, andInglewoodhavepassedordinances liketheseinrecentdays, andIthink
thecitiesofSLOCountyshoulddothesame.
1
Packet Page 6
Item 1
Sincerely,
Cathryn Sells
724MentoneAve.
GroverBeach
805-473-3880
csells@charter.net
2
Packet Page 7
Item 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Krista Jeffries
Wednesday, November 20, 2019 7:54 PM
cou ncil@prcity.com; citycou ncil@pismobeach.org; crayrussom@a rroyog ra nde.org;
citycouncil@atascadero.org; E-mail Council Website; jpeschong@co.slo.ca.us;
bgibson@co.slo.ca.us; ahill@co.slo.ca.us; lcompton@co.slo.ca.us;
darnold@co.slo.ca.us; council@morrobayca.gov
Urgency Renter Protection Ordinance
Hello to Our SLO County Elected Officials,
My name is Krista Jeffries and I am an organizer for SLO County "Yes In My Backyard." We advocate for better city
planning, efficient land use policies, and more walkable, cleaner, greener communities that are more affordable and
accessible to everyone. Part of that advocacy includes protecting tenants from unjust evictions and rent increases, as we
seek to boost our housing supply without putting renters at risk of displacement.
As of this moment, more than two dozen cities and counties across the state have enacted emergency ordinances to
keep tenants home for the holidays. There have been increasing reports statewide of evictions and rent-gouging in the
months before senate bill 1482 goes into effect, particularly among long term senior tenants who have been living in
their homes for 10+ years.
I contacted the SLO Legal Referral Service, California Rural Legal Assistance, and the San Luis Obispo Legal Assistance
Foundation to inquire as to whether they were seeing an increase in these types of calls, and they all responded with an
unequivocal "Yes." The woman who answered the phone at CRLA said they are overwhelmed with calls and walk-ins for
tenants asking for help staying home for the holidays. "We normally only take appointments but we just can't keep them
from coming in," she told me. Frank Kopcinski, directing attorney of CRLA, reports 26 calls just since the governor signed
581482 on October 8th - five in North County, five in South County, 13 in the city of SLO and four in Los Osos. He also
says that they are experiencing a higher than normal volume of calls from those who make too much money to qualify
for their services.
Several weeks ago, several members of our YIMBY group sent out emails to their respective elected leaders regarding
this statewide phenomenon and asked the city councils and Board to protect their tenants with an urgency ordinance
enacting 1482 immediately. We were met with lukewarm or indifferent reactions by almost every council member we
contacted, if we received any response at all. The most prescriptive response was that in order to bring that to an
agenda item, we would need to essentially prove that this was happening en mass, in each community. This was
disappointing, as our region is well established as one of the least affordable areas in the country, and stories like
Grandview are happening in small scale all over the county on a near constant basis.
In Grover Beach, local renter, husband, and father of two KC Gilway came to council on November 4th to report that his
landlord increased his rent by almost 30%, followed shortly by an emailed eviction notice, along with a link describing
the components of SB 1482. This Monday, November 18th, Grover Beach City Council stepped up to the plate and chose
to enact emergency protections for their tenant residents, who are 55% of their population. By the next meeting, GBCC
had prioritized this need with only a handful of tenants' stories. How many renters need to come forward with the
abuses, evictions, and rent increases they suffer, before our other leaders take action? How bad does it need to get?
How many more homeless families and seniors need to be on the street before we move up enforcement of a state law
that's already been set to take place in a few weeks? This critical time frame can make all the difference in the world to a
family about to lose their home.
Packet Page 8
Item 1
Additionally, GovernorNewsomdeclaredastateofemergencyregarding rentincreasesonOctober27th. Under
CaliforniaPenalCodeSection396, forthefollowing30-dayperiodafteradisasterhasbeendeclared, itisunlawfulfora
person, contractor, business, orotherentity toselloroffer tosellanyconsumergoodsorservices – includingrental
housing – foraprice morethan10percentabovetheprice chargedbythatpersonforthosegoodsorservices
immediatelypriortotheproclamation ordeclaration ofemergency. ThisisclearlybeingviolatedbytheGilway's
landlord. Howmanymoreareinviolation?
Thereisnocentralizedtenantsrightsgroupthatcancommunicatetheselegalchangestorentersinourcounty. Itis
currentlyincumbentupontenantsthemselves tostayinformed, anddefendthemselvesattheirowncost, from
landlordswhobreakthelawandneglect theirresponsibilities. SLOCountyYIMBYurges allofyoutoseriouslyconsider
thesameprotectionsthatGroverBeachand27citiesandcountiesinCaliforniahavealreadyenacted (andmoreareto
come). Youoweittoyourconstituents. Pleaseconsider agendizing thisprotectivestep. Thankyouforyour
consideration.
KristaJeffries
SLOCoYIMBY Organizer
1151 Ramona Avenue
Grover Beach93433
805-904-7325
2
Packet Page 9
Item 1
From: Krista Jeffries
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 12:01 PM
To: Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>
Cc: Stanwyck, Shelly <sstanwyc@slocity.org>
Subject: Re: Urgency Renter Protection Ordinance
Thank you for your response. There is in fact a legal loophole allowing landlords to gouge the rent and evict tenants
right now, which is why so many cities have had to pick up the pieces and scramble in recent weeks. The reps
negotiating in favor of stronger retroactivity protections ended up acquiescing to the realtor lobby, who promised that
this would not happen. Look where its gotten us, huh?
The retroactivity that IS in the law is regarding rent increases only (assuming the tenants have not been evicted), in
that any tenant who's rent has been increased past a certain amount will be lowered. There's a formula that I can't
recall off the top of my head, but those tenants would have to still be living in that home for it to apply. If they got
evicted during this time period, not only do they not get their rent lowered, but they don't get the just-cause eviction
protection because it only kicks in after 12m of tenancy.
When I spoke with David from CRLA, I told him I didn't get the sense that tenants really advocated for themselves at all,
that they're uncomfortable fighting back against their landlords, and since there are few high paying jobs or resources in
the area compared to other places in the country/state, there's not much incentive to stand up to dishonest or bad-
faith actors in the tenant/landlord game. He said that I was absolutely right. There is no centralized tenant advocacy
group, no way to disseminate important information in an efficient manner, and the burden is entirely on the tenant to
advocate for themselves. So you can imagine how shocked I was to see KC Gilway at the GB council doing just that. It
was unprecedented for the area, as far as I'm concerned, and David agreed. "Landlords have it pretty easy around
here," he told me. So I really hope its understood that waiting for tenants to come tell us about the mistreatment they
suffer is waiting for a train that will likely never show. Poor quality housing, high rents, being jerked around,
threatened, or harassed is all just par for the course.
I will be out of town for the next ten days and wont be able to make it to council soon, but hopefully I can get one of
our members to make public comment (whether its agendized or not) regarding the need for systemic tenant
protections in the county, perhaps above and beyond 1482. Ultimately I feel the answer lies in more housing supply in
our city limits, but until we reach those goals, we need to protect the tenants we have now.
Packet Page 10
Item 1
Thank you again for reaching out. I understand this is kind of a 'buzzkill' before the holiday next week and I admire your
dedication.
Krista Jeffries
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:42 AM Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org> wrote:
Krista -
Thanks for writing. When council was asked about this a few weeks ago, I wrote back saying that my understanding was
that the state law already prohibited this type of action. If not, could she please send an example ordinance (cited in LA
and a couple other SoCal locations) as I couldn't find any item about it on line. I heard back that there had been a
misunderstanding and we are actually all set as is.
So I am surprised to see your email, and I guess I am asking the same questions: are the evictions illegal and this is an
enforcement issue, or is there truly a loophole that is not being addressed at the state level already? If it is legal, what
is the ordinance that would stop it? If this is truly critical, it can be done, but even with a model ordinance it is
expensive because of notification, staff vetting, and calling an additional council meeting (we only have one more
scheduled this year). Frankly I think it would be mid-way through December before we could actually get an ordinance
enacted. With so little time left before the state law is in place, I'm afraid we will have limited effectiveness trying to
enact this now.
I'm so sorry the evictions or gouging are happening; I personally didn't hear from any SLO residents and am sad to hear
that 13 reached out to CRLA, indicating there are likely others.
I'll check in with staff if there are other thoughts on this item, and please let me know if you have other thoughts or
ideas that could help the situation at this point in time.
Thanks.
Andy
CITY OF Sfln LUIS OBISPO
1
2 Packet Page 11
Item 1
Eapease@slocity.org
slocity.org
From: KristaJeffries
Sent: Wednesday, November20, 2019 7:54PM
To: council@prcity.com; citycouncil@pismobeach.org; crayrussom@arroyogrande.org; citycouncil@atascadero.org; E-
mailCouncilWebsite <emailcouncil@slocity.org>; jpeschong@co.slo.ca.us; bgibson@co.slo.ca.us; ahill@co.slo.ca.us;
lcompton@co.slo.ca.us; darnold@co.slo.ca.us; council@morrobayca.gov
Subject: UrgencyRenterProtectionOrdinance
HellotoOurSLOCountyElected Officials,
MynameisKristaJeffriesandIamanorganizerforSLOCounty "YesInMyBackyard." Weadvocateforbettercity
planning, efficientlandusepolicies, andmorewalkable, cleaner, greenercommunitiesthataremoreaffordableand
accessibletoeveryone. Partofthatadvocacyincludesprotectingtenantsfromunjustevictionsandrentincreases, as
weseektoboost ourhousingsupplywithout puttingrentersatriskofdisplacement.
Asofthismoment, morethantwodozencitiesandcountiesacrossthestatehaveenactedemergencyordinancesto
keeptenantshomefortheholidays. Therehavebeenincreasingreportsstatewideofevictionsandrent-gouginginthe
monthsbefore senate bill1482 goesintoeffect, particularly among longtermseniortenants whohavebeenlivingin
theirhomes for10+ years.
Icontacted theSLOLegalReferral Service, California RuralLegalAssistance, andtheSanLuisObispoLegalAssistance
Foundationtoinquireastowhethertheywereseeinganincreaseinthesetypes ofcalls, andtheyallresponded with
anunequivocal "Yes." Thewomanwhoanswered thephone atCRLA saidtheyareoverwhelmed withcallsandwalk-ins
fortenantsaskingforhelpstayinghomefortheholidays. "Wenormally onlytakeappointmentsbutwejustcan'tkeep
themfromcomingin," shetold me. FrankKopcinski, directingattorneyofCRLA, reports26callsjustsincethegovernor
signedSB1482onOctober8th - fiveinNorthCounty, fiveinSouthCounty, 13inthecityofSLOandfourinLosOsos. He
alsosaysthattheyareexperiencing ahigherthannormalvolumeofcallsfromthosewhomaketoomuchmoneyto
qualifyfortheirservices.
Severalweeksago, severalmembersofourYIMBYgroupsentoutemailstotheirrespectiveelectedleadersregarding
thisstatewidephenomenonandaskedthecitycouncilsandBoardtoprotecttheirtenantswithanurgencyordinance
enacting1482immediately. Weweremetwithlukewarmorindifferentreactionsbyalmosteverycouncilmemberwe
contacted, ifwereceivedanyresponseatall. Themostprescriptiveresponsewasthatinordertobringthattoan
agendaitem, wewouldneedtoessentially provethatthiswashappeningenmass, ineachcommunity. Thiswas
disappointing, asourregion iswellestablishedasoneoftheleastaffordableareasinthecountry, andstorieslike
Grandviewarehappeninginsmallscalealloverthecountyonanearconstantbasis.
3
Packet Page 12
Item 1
InGroverBeach, localrenter, husband, andfatheroftwoKCGilwaycametocouncilonNovember4thtoreportthathis
landlordincreasedhisrentbyalmost30%, followedshortlybyanemailed evictionnotice, alongwithalinkdescribing
thecomponents ofSB 1482. ThisMonday, November 18th, GroverBeachCityCouncilsteppeduptotheplateand
chose toenactemergencyprotections fortheirtenantresidents, whoare55% oftheirpopulation. Bythenextmeeting,
GBCChadprioritized thisneedwithonlyahandful oftenants' stories. Howmanyrenters needtocomeforward with
theabuses, evictions, andrentincreases theysuffer, beforeourotherleaderstake action? Howbaddoesitneedto
get? Howmanymorehomeless familiesandseniorsneedtobeonthestreetbeforewemove upenforcement ofa
state lawthat'salreadybeensettotakeplaceinafewweeks? Thiscriticaltimeframecanmakeallthedifferenceinthe
worldtoafamilyabout tolosetheirhome.
Additionally, GovernorNewsomdeclaredastateofemergencyregarding rentincreasesonOctober27th. Under
CaliforniaPenalCodeSection396, forthefollowing30-dayperiodafteradisasterhasbeendeclared, itisunlawfulfora
person, contractor, business, orotherentity toselloroffertosellanyconsumergoodsorservices – includingrental
housing – forapricemorethan10percentabovethepricechargedbythatpersonforthosegoodsorservices
immediately priortotheproclamationordeclarationofemergency. ThisisclearlybeingviolatedbytheGilway's
landlord. Howmanymoreareinviolation?
Thereisnocentralizedtenantsrightsgroupthatcancommunicate theselegalchanges torentersinourcounty. Itis
currentlyincumbentupontenantsthemselves tostayinformed, anddefendthemselvesattheirowncost, from
landlordswhobreakthelawandneglect theirresponsibilities. SLOCountyYIMBYurges allofyoutoseriouslyconsider
thesameprotectionsthatGroverBeachand27citiesandcountiesinCaliforniahavealreadyenacted (andmoreareto
come). Youoweittoyourconstituents. Pleaseconsideragendizingthisprotectivestep. Thankyouforyour
consideration.
KristaJeffries
SLOCoYIMBY Organizer
1151RamonaAvenue
GroverBeach93433
805-904-7325
4
Packet Page 13
Item 1
From: Linda Kel
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 12:18 PM
To: Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>
Subject: Re: Evictions subsequent to the passing and signing into law AB 1482
First of all, I apologize for addressing you as "Mr." Pease. I'm pretty much on overload lately, and I just
wasn't thinking clearly.
Yes, I do live in the City of San Luis Obispo.
Thank you for responding to my email.
Linda
On Friday, November 22, 2019, 11 :48:09 AM PST, Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org> wrote:
Linda -
Thanks for writing and I'm so sorry to hear about your rental situation.
Do you live in the City of San Luis Obispo?
Andy
Andy Pease
Council Member
CITY OF San LUIS OBISPO
From: Linda Kelly
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 11 :45 AM
To: Pease, Andy <apease@slocity.org>
Subject: Evictions subsequent to the passing and signing into law AB 1482
Dear Mr. Pease,
I am sure that by now your are aware of the emergency ordinance just passed by the City of Grover Beach in an attempt
to protect renters from evictions for no other reason than to avoid the restrictions and provisions of AB 1482 (Rent Cap
Law) which goes into effect on January 1, 2020. I, too, have been subject to eviction by the end of the year for the sole
purpose of what the property manager describes as bringing my rent to "fair market value". I have lived in my current
rental for 21 years. I have never been late in the payment of my rent, nor have I ever missed a payment in all that
time. In the first 17 years or my tenancy, I dealt directly with the owner of the property. In that time, my rent was never
raised. A property manager was hired 4 years ago, and has given me one appropriate increase in my rent. In September
of this year, I was notified by the property manager that my rent would by increased by 47% effective November of this
year. He then decided to rollback my rent to its current amount, but give me a 60 day notice of eviction on October 31,
2019, and I will be required to vacate the property on December 31, 2019. This will allow the property manager to
increase the rent to any desired amount as of the first of the year. I don't know if the owner is even aware of these
changes since I have been prohibited, in no uncertain terms, from contacting the owner for any reason.
I don't believe that I am alone in dealing with this type of manipulation of lives in order to insure greater profits.
I welcome any response either on a personal level or, better yet,in the form of action by the council to protect tenants from
this abuse.
Thank you for listening,
Linda K. Kelly
Packet Page 14
Item 1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sophie Fauchier-Specker
Friday, November 22, 2019 5:20 PM
E-mail Council Website
Fwd: Council Member Meeting Request
Good evening,
I would like to set up a meeting for an EMERGENCY ORDINANCE to stop the rent being increased at the
Poinsettia Street Apartments (4035 Poinsettia Street) here in San Luis Obispo that are designed for families
with low income and disabilities, and have been for at least twenty years by HASLO. The rent was raised by
$500.00 (today in fact I received the notice, I had to tell my children before Christmas) in one month. No one
can afford that in these low income apartments. My friend Jodi with cerebral palsy cannot afford it and I am
a single mother and there is no possible way for me to afford it. In fact, no one in the apartment complex
can afford the rent hike and we will all be forced to be homeless. I understand they are doing this before it
is against the law to raise rent above a certain percentage in January. Please help me protect these families,
my friend with cerebral palsy, the elderly, and single parents struggling to make ends meet. These
apartments have been a part of HASLO (low income housing) where we are to pay 30% of our income
toward rent plus utilities. I am requesting an EMERGENCY stop to the $500 rent increase that was just
forced on us. I have read this just happened in Grover Beach as well and the City Council was able to help
people and stop them from being homeless and the rent from being raised by making the law go into effect
before January.
Please let me know what the next steps are. This is all new to me and I need your help.
Sincerely,
Sophie Specker
805-305-6995
sophiefauchierl@gmail.com
I appreciate your time.
Packet Page 15
Item 1
From:
Sent:
Subject:
James Lopes
Monday, November 25, 2019 9:02 AM
Questions about SLO City Rent Increases
Hi Friends in the News Media and City of SLO,
I recently learned that my affordable housing neighbors are being slapped with 300%+ rent
increases, right before the holidays.
They live in an "affordable" apartment complex at Poinsettia Street. The project was apparently
required as a condition of the Edna-Islay development. And now, the rumor is that some "term" of
requiring affordable units will be expiring. The units were not dedicated to the City -Why not??
Why is the City of SLO requiring exorbitant rent increases from the renters who occupy those few
affordable homes which the City obtains from developers?
Why does the City treat the recipients of its affordable housing strategy like human "units?" Why
would the City Housing Authority (HASLO) send anxious tenants such incoherent notices, with no
explanation except that they are doing it?
Why would HASLO apparently time the notice (10/18/19) three days after Governor Newsom
signed the law (10/15/19) prohibiting rent increases after March, 2019, this year?
What kind of city do we live in that the affordable housing strategy essentially evicts low-income
tenants?
Why would they do this Scrooge-like maneuver at the start of the Christmas season?
What assurance do affordable housing tenants have for some financial security when they are not
even given leases to count on consistent rent?
Why are low-income people not given fair dignity to live in the same affordable units which our
city council, planners and bureaucrats claim as their best solution, their only victory against
unaffordable housing in SLO?
Who in the SLO City government can be proud of this rent increase, in defense even brag that
they run a humane program?
What will our City Council do to stop this inexcusable action, and correct the course HASLO is on?
I will deeply appreciate any answers you can find to my questions and concerns.
James Lopes
Packet Page 16
Item 1
Wilbanks, Megan
From:ErinFoote <carefullycooked@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday,
To:E-mailCouncilWebsite
Subject:Supportfortenant'srightsurgencyordinance!
EsteemedCouncil,
Istronglysupport thepassingofan "urgency ordinance" tomakeAB1482effectiveimmediately. The
councilmustdowhatitcantoprotectcitizensfromunscrupulouslandlords, lookingtoskirtatenant
rightsbillaheadofits' state-wideimplementation.
Thankyou fortakingup suchanimportantissueforourcity, inwhich65% ofresidentsrent.
Sincerely,
Erin & Michael Foote
LawrenceDr, San LuisObispo, 93401
1
Packet Page 17
Item 1
Wilbanks, Megan
From:csells@charter.net
Sent:25, 20199:35PM
To:E-mailCouncilWebsite
Subject:Evictionprotection
HonorableCouncilMembers,
PreviouslyIemailed yourequesting thatyouconsideranemergencyordinance toprotect renters during
theperiodbeforeSB1482 takeseffect inJanuary, 2020. What Ididn'trealize whenIapologized fornot
understandingthattherestrictionsonrentincreaseswereretroactivebacktoMarch, 2019, wasthat
there wasnobuilt-inprotectionfor evictions.
Itappears thatthere aresome "badactors" outthere inourcountywhoaretakingadvantage ofthis
loophole andareusing ittoevict tenants. Grover Beach hastakentheaction ofpassing anemergency
ordinancetoprevent suchevictions.
Iurgeyoutopassasimilaremergencyordinance toprotecttherentersinthecityofSanLuisObispoasI
hearthatthere areresidents therewhowouldfindtheirholidays muchmoreenjoyableifsuchan
ordinancewerepassed.
Thank you,
Cathryn Sells
GroverBeach
805-473-3880
1
Packet Page 18
Item 1
Wilbanks, Megan
From:MariamAlikhan <gobluemariam@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, November
To:E-mailCouncilWebsite
Subject:Pleasesupportemergency rentalordinance
HelloColleaguesandfriends,
Thankyouforconsidering anemergencyordinancetoprotectrentersduringthisveryshort, butvital
period priortoJanuary1. Asyouprobably know, theGroverBeachCityCouncilsupportedsuchan
ordinanceunanimouslyandIwouldurgeyoutodothesame. Withtheextreme housingshortagewe
faceonthecentralcoast, ourbestoptiontofighthomelessness istopreventitfromhappening. Please
passtheemergency ordinanceandkeepvulnerable rentershoused.
Sincerely, MariamShah
SentfrommyiPhone
1
Packet Page 19
Item 1
Tonikian, Victoria
From:JohnGrady <johngrady5@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday,
To:E-mailCouncilWebsite
Subject:RentIncrease limits
DearMayorand CityCouncilmembers,
Isupportandurgeyourpassingofanemergency ordinancetoprotect renters andlimittheirrentincreasesimmediatelyin
compliancewiththe soonto beeffective statelaweffective 1/1/2020.
Thank you.
JohnGrady
SanLuisObispo
1
Packet Page 20
Item 1
O ______
ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2019 SERIES)
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING JUST CAUSE
EVICTION PROTECTIONS AND RENTAL RATE LIMITS EFFECTIVE
IMMEDIATELY
WHEREAS, the “Tenant Protection Act of 2019” (“AB 1482”) was enacted by the
Legislature on September 11, 2019 and signed by the Governor on October 8, 2019; and
WHEREAS, effective January 1, 2020, AB 1482 will add provisions to California landlord
tenant law requiring just cause for evictions and imposing limits on rent increases; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to its police powers, has broad authority to
maintain the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare of its community and to preserve the
quality of life for its residents; and
WHEREAS, housing instability threatens the public peace, health, safety, and general
welfare as eviction from one’s home can lead to prolonged homelessness; increased residential
mobility; loss of community; strain on household finances due to the necessity of paying rental
application fees and security deposits; stress and anxiety experienced by those displaced; increased
commute times and traffic impacts if displaced workers cannot find affordable housing within the
city in which they work; and interruption of the education of children in the home; and
WHEREAS, eviction creates particular hardships for individuals and household of limited
means, given the shortage of housing, particularly affordable housing, within the City of San Luis
Obispo and San Luis Obispo region generally; and
WHEREAS, as AB 1482 does not go into effect until January 1, 2020, landlords could
seek to evict tenants without cause in order to implement rent increase that would not otherwise
be possible after the effective date; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to prohibit exorbitant rental rate increases as well as evictions
without just cause during this transition period; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that regulating the relations between
residential landlords and tenants will increase certainty and fairness within the residential rental
market in the City thereby serve the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, Article VI, Section 605 of the City Charter provides that the City Council
may as an emergency measure, for preserving the public peace, health or safety, and containing a
statement of the reasons for its urgency, may be introduced and adopted at once at the same
meeting if passed by at least four (4) affirmative votes; and
Packet Page 21
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 2
O ______
WHEREAS, the emergency ordinance is intended to enact the rental protections that will
go into effect on January 1, 2020 under AB 1482 immediately within the City of San Luis Obispo
to prohibit an owner of residential property from preemptively increasing rent in excess of
allowable state limits or engaging in no cause evictions in order to evade the application of state
law; and
WHEREAS, an emergency ordinance that is effective immediately is necessary to avoid
the immediate threat to public peace, health, safety, or welfare, as failure to adopt this emergency
ordinance could result in predatory rent increases and eviction actions by landlords seeking to
avoid or diminish the limitations of state law before its effective date presenting a risk of the
displacement of the City’s residents and community members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The City Council finds that the forgoing recitals
and administrative report presented with this ordinance are true and correct and are incorporated
in the ordinance by this reference and adopted as findings of the City Council.
SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council herby finds, determines and declares that this
emergency ordinance, adopted pursuant to Government Code Sections 36934 and 36937 is
necessary because:
(a) Housing is difficult to procure in the San Luis Obispo area because of a very low
vacancy rate (3.63% according to the American Communities Survey). The rental
increases and evictions without just cause reported to be occurring in advance of the
effectiveness of AB 1482 destabilize the housing market and can result in the loss of
attainable housing.
(b) For the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and general welfare
the City Council finds that it is necessary to adopt an ordinance regulating rental rate
increases and just cause evictions, for all reasons set forth in the recitals.
(c) Without the imposition of this ordinance, rental rate increases and eviction without
cause may result in the displacement of residential tenants who could be forced to find
new housing in an ever-more expensive housing market before a non-emergency
ordinance or AB 1482 would become effective, and would significantly increase the
risk of residential tenants becoming homeless or being forced to leave their established
community due to unavailability of equivalent housing.
(d) There is a current and immediate threat to the public peace, health, safety, and general
welfare of the City and its community, due in part to the gap between adoption and
implementation of AB 1482 which increases the risk of tenant displacement prior to
the effective date of the bill, thereby necessitating the immediate enactment of this
emergency ordinance in order to ensure that tenants are not subjected to predatory rent
increases or forced out to their homes without just cause.
Packet Page 22
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 3
O ______
SECTION 3. Urgent Need. Based on the foregoing recitals and findings, all of which are
deemed true and correct, this ordinance is urgently needed for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, safety, or welfare. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption
in accordance with the provisions set forth in Article VI, Section 605 of the City Charter.
SECTION 4. Just Cause Eviction Protections.
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, if at the time the landlord serves a notice to terminate
tenancy, the tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied a residential real property
for twelve (12) consecutive months, the owner of the residential real property shall not
terminate the tenancy without just cause, which shall be stated in the written notice to
terminate tenancy. If any additional adult tenants are added to the lease before an
existing tenant has continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real property for
twenty-four (24) consecutive months, then this section shall only apply if either of the
following are satisfied:
(1) All of the tenants have continuously and lawfully occupied the residential real
property for twelve (12) consecutive months or more (e.g., a minor child has
reached the age of majority and is added to the lease).
(2) Section 4 (a) shall not apply to a termination of a tenancy where an adult tenant
who has not occupied for at least 12 months, except as provided in Section 4 (a)(1).
(b) For the purposes of this section, “just cause” includes either of the following:
(1) At-fault just cause, which is any of the following:
(A) Default in the payment of rent.
(B) A breach of a material term of the lease, as described in paragraph three (3) of
Section 1161 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, including, but not
limited to, violation of a provision of the lease after being issued a written notice
to correct the violation.
(C) Maintaining, committing, or permitting the maintenance or commission of a
nuisance as described in paragraph four (4) of Section 1161 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure.
(D) Committing waste as described in paragraph four (4) of Section 1161 of the
California Code of Civil Procedure.
(E) The tenant had a written lease that terminated on or after November 26, 2019,
and after a written request or demand from the owner, the tenant has refused to
execute a written extension or renewal or the lea se for an additional term of
similar duration with similar provisions, provided that those terms do not
violate this section or any other provision of law.
(F) Criminal activity by the tenant on the residential real property, including any
common areas, or any criminal activity or criminal threat, as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 422 of the California Penal Code, on or off the
residential real property, that is directed at any owner or agent of the owner of
the residential real property.
Packet Page 23
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 4
O ______
(G) Assigning or subletting the premises in violation of the tenant’s lease, as
described in paragraph four (4) of Section 1161 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure.
(H) The tenant’s refusal to allow the owner to enter the residential real property as
authorized by Sections 1101.5 and 1954 of the California Civil Code and
Sections 13113.7 and 17926.1 of the California Health and Safety Code.
(I) Using the premises for an unlawful purpose as described in paragraph four (4)
of Section 1161 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
(J) The employee, agent, or licensee’s failure to vacate after their termination as an
employee, agent, or licensee as described in paragraph one (1) of Section 1161
of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
(K) When the tenant fails to deliver possession of the residential property after
providing the owner written notice as provided in Section 1946 of the California
Civil Code of the tenant’s intention to terminate the hiring of the real property,
or makes a written offer to surrender that is accepted in writing by the landlord,
but fails to deliver possession at the time specified it that written notice as
described in paragraph five (5) of Section 1161 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure.
(2) No-fault just cause, which includes any of the following:
(A) Intent to occupy the residential real property by the owner or their spouse,
domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents.
(B) Withdrawal of the residential real property from the rental market.
(C) Compliance with order to vacate, including any of the following:
(i) An order issued by a government agency or court relating to habitability
that necessitates vacating the residential real property.
(ii) An order issued by a government agency or court to vacate the residential
real property.
(iii) A local ordinance that necessitates vacating the residential real property.
(iv) If it is determined by any government agency or court that the tenant is at
fault for the condition or conditions triggering the order or need to vacate
under clause (i), the tenant shall not be entitled to relocation assistance as
outlined in paragraph three (3) of subdivision (d).
(D) Intent to demolish or to substantially rehabilitate or remodel the residential real
property.
(i) For the purposes of this subparagraph, “substantially rehabilitate or
remodel” means the replacement or substantial modification of any
structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical system that requires a
permit from a governmental agency, or the abatement of hazardous
materials, including lead-based paint, mold, or asbestos, in accordance
with applicable federal, state, and local laws, that cannot be reasonably
accomplished in a safe manner with the tenant in place and that requires
the tenant to vacate the residential real property for at least thirty (30)
days. Cosmetic improvements alone, including painting, decorating, and
minor repairs, or other work that can be performed safely without having
the residential real property vacated, do not qualify as substantial
rehabilitation or remodel.
Packet Page 24
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 5
O ______
(c) Before an owner of residential real property issues a notice to terminate a tenancy for
just cause that is a curable lease violation, the owner shall first give notice of the
violation to the tenant with an opportunity to cure the violation pursuant to paragraph
three (3) of Section 1161 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. If the violation is
not cured within the time period set forth in the notice, the tenancy may thereafter be
terminated in accordance with otherwise applicable law.
(d) Rental assistance or waiver of rent.
(1) For a tenancy for which just cause is required to terminate the tenancy under
subdivision (a), if an owner of residential real property issues a termination notice
based on a no-fault just cause described in paragraph two (2) of subdivision (b), the
owner shall, regardless of the tenant’s income, at the owner’s option, do one of the
following:
(A) Assist the tenant to relocate by providing a direct payment to the tenant as
described in paragraph three (3) below.
(B) Waive, in writing, the payment of rent for the final month of the tenancy, prior
to the rent becoming due.
(2) If an owner issues a notice to terminate a tenancy for no-fault just cause, the owner
shall notify the tenant of the tenant’s right to relocation assistance or rent waiver
pursuant to this section. If the owner elects to waive the rent for the final month of
the tenancy as provided in subparagraph (B) of paragraph one (1), the notice shall
state the amount of rent waived and that no rent is due for the final month of the
tenancy.
(A) The amount of relocation assistance or rent waiver shall be equal to one (1)
month of the tenant’s rent that was in effect when the owner issued the notice
to terminate the tenancy. Any relocation assistance shall be provided within
fifteen (15) calendar days of service of the notice.
(B) If a tenant fails to vacate as required by the notice to terminate the tenancy,
the actual amount of any relocation assistance or rent waiver provided
pursuant to this subdivision shall be recoverable as damages in an action to
recover possession.
(C) The relocation assistance or rent waiver required by this section shall be
credited against any other relocation assistance required by any other law.
(3) An owner’s failure to strictly comply with this subdivision shall render the notice
of termination void.
(e) This section shall not apply to the following types of residential real properties or
residential circumstances:
(1) Transient and tourist hotel occupancy as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 1940
of the California Civil Code.
Packet Page 25
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 6
O ______
(2) Housing accommodations in a nonprofit hospital, religious facility, extended care
facility, licensed residential care facility for the elderly, as defined in Section
1569.2 of the California Health and Safety Code, or an adult residential facility, as
defined in Chapter six (6) of Division six (6) of Title twenty-two (22) of the Manual
of Policies and Procedures published by the California State Department of Social
Services.
(3) Dormitories owned and operated by an institution of higher education or a
kindergarten and grades one (1) to twelve (12), inclusive, school.
(4) Housing accommodations in which the tenant shares bathroom or kitchen facilities
with the owner who maintains their principal residence at the residential real
property.
(5) Single-family owner-occupied residences, including a residence in which the
owner occupant rents or leases no more than two (2) units or bedrooms, including,
but not limited to, an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit.
(6) A duplex in which the owner occupies one of the units as the owner’s principal
place of residence at the beginning of the tenancy, so long as the owner continues
in occupancy.
(7) Housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy after February 1, 1995.
(8) Residential real property that is alienable separate from the title to any other
dwelling unit or is a subdivided interest in a subdivision as specified in subdivision
(b), (d), or (f) of Section 11004.5 of the California Business and Professions Code.
(9) Housing restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a
government agency, or other recorded document as affordable housing for persons
and families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of
the California Health and Safety Code, or subject to an agreement that provides
housing subsidies for affordable housing for persons and families of very low, low,
or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and
Safety Code or comparable federal statutes.
(f) The provisions of this section shall apply to all residential rental units not specified as
exempt from its requirements, including where a notice to vacate or quit any such rental
unit has been served prior to, as of, or after the ef fective date of this emergency
ordinance, but where an unlawful detainer judgment has not been issued as of the
effective date of this emergency ordinance.
(g) Any waiver of the rights under this section shall be void as contrary to public policy.
(h) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “Owner” and “residential real property” shall have the same meaning as those terms
are defined in California Civil Code Section 1954.51.
(2) “Tenancy” means the lawful occupation of residential real property and includes a
lease or sublease.
(i) Any waiver of the rights under this section shall be void as contrary to public policy.
Packet Page 26
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 7
O ______
SECTION 5. Rental Rate Limit Provisions.
(a) To the extent permitted under California Civil Code Section 1954.52 and subject to
subdivision (b), an owner of residential real property shall not increase the gross rental
rate for a dwelling or a unit more than 8.3 percent (8.3%) of the gross rental rate charged
for that dwelling or unit prior to the effective date of these Rental Rate Limit Provisions.
In determining the gross rental amount pursuant to this section, any rent discounts,
incentives, concessions, or credits offered by the owner of such unit of residential real
property and accepted by the tenant shall be excluded. The gross per-month rental rate
and any owner-offered discounts, incentives, concessions, or credits shall be separately
listed and identified in the lease or rental agreement or any amendments to an existing
lease or rental agreement.
(b) For a new tenancy in which no tenant from the prior tenancy remains in lawful
possession of the residential real property, the owner may establish the initial rental rate
not subject to subdivision (a). Subdivision (a) is only applicable to subsequent increases
after that initial rental rate has been established for a tenancy to which these provisions
apply.
(c) A tenant of residential real property subject to this section shall not enter into a sublease
that results in a total rent for the premises that exceeds the allowable rental rate
authorized by subdivision (a). Nothing in this subdivision authorizes a tenant to sublet
or assign the tenant’s interest where otherwise prohibited.
(d) This section shall not apply to the following residential real properties:
(1) Housing restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a
government agency, or other recorded document as affordable housing for persons
and families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of
the California Health and Safety Code, or subject to an agreement that provides
housing subsidies for affordable housing for persons and families of very low, low,
or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and
Safety Code or comparable federal statutes.
(2) Dormitories constructed and maintained in connection with any higher education
institution within the state for use and occupancy by students in attendance at the
institution.
(3) Housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy after February 1, 1995.
(4) Residential real property that is alienable separate from the title to any other
dwelling unit or is a subdivided interest in a subdivision as specified in subdivision
(b), (d), or (f) of Section 11004.5 of the California Business and Professions Code.
(5) A duplex in which the owner occupied one of the units as the owner’s principal
place of residence at the beginning of the tenancy, so long as the owner continues
in occupancy.
(e) An owner shall provide notice of any increase in the rental rate, pursuant to subdivision
(a), to each tenant in accordance with California Civil Code Section 827.
(f) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “Owner” and “residential real property” shall have the same meaning as those terms
are defined in Section California Civil Code Section 1954.51.
(2) “Tenancy” means the lawful occupation of residential real property and includes a
lease or sublease.
Packet Page 27
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 8
O ______
(g) This section shall apply to all rent increases subject to subdivision (a) effective on or
after November 26, 2019
(h) This section shall become operative on November 26, 2019.
(j) In the event that an owner has sent any rent increase notice on or after September 1,
2019, to increase the rent effective on or after November 26, 2019, the increased rent
may not be by more than the amount permissible under subdivision (a) and the rental
rate increase will be deemed to be the rental rate increase permitted by subdivision.
(k) Any waiver of the rights under this section shall be void as contrary to public policy.
SETION 6. Enforcement. An owner’s failure to comply with any requirement of this
ordinance, is a complete affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer or other action brought by the
owner to recover possession of the rental unit. A tenant may bring a civil suit in the courts of the
state alleging that the owner has violated any of the provisions of this ordinance including that the
owner has demanded, accepted, received, or retained a payment or payments in excess of Rental
Rate Limit Provisions.
SECTION 7. Effectiveness. This emergency ordinance shall be uncodified and remain in
effect through December 31, 2019. On January 1, 2020, this ordinance shall be automatically
repealed and shall be of no further force and effect, except that causes of action for conduct alleged
to have occurred during the effective term of this ordinance and not otherwise subject to the
provisions of AB 1482 shall survive the repeal of this ordinance and shall be governed by the
provisions in effect at the time the action alleged to have been prohibited by this ordinance
occurred.
SECTION 8. Environmental Determination. In accordance with California
Environmental Quality Act guidelines section 15061(b)(3), adoption of this emergency ordinance
is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act because there is no
possibility that the implementation of this ordinance may have significant effects on the
environment. This ordinance will apply tenant protections to existing residential units for a limited
period of time.
SECTION 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted
the ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the
fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid
or unconstitutional.
Packet Page 28
Item 1
Ordinance No. _____ (2019 Series) Page 9
O ______
SECTION 10. Legislative history and effective date. This ordinance was adopted on
November 26, 2019 and shall be effective immediately and codified in Chapter 9.18 and shall be
automatically repealed on December 31, 2019 at midnight.
INTRODUCED on the ______ day of __________, 2019, AND FINALLY ADOPTED
by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the _______ day of _________, 2019, on the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this __________ day of _______________________, _________.
______________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Page 29
Item 1
Emergency Ordinance “Just Cause”
Protections and Rent Increase
Limits
Derek Johnson, City Manager
November 26, 2019
1
Recommendation
1.Review and consider public correspondence and
testimony related to AB 1482; and
2.Consider the adoption of an Emergency Ordinance
approving “just cause” protections and rental increase
limits to be in effect immediately upon introduction and
adoption, until January 1, 2020.
1.Strike Section 4 (a) (2).
2
Background – AB1482
On October 8th, 2019, Governor Newsom signed AB
1482 into law, and it is effective January 1, 2020.
1.Places a cap on the amount rents may be increased
a)Maximum increase of 5% + inflation (CPI) or 10%,
whichever is lower
b)Rent cap provisions are retroactive to March 15, 2019
2.Imposes “just cause” requirements for removing tenants
a)AB 1482 allows a landlord to set a new rate with each
new tenant
b)“Just cause” provisions were added to prevent
strategic use of tenant removal to avoid rent caps
3
Response to AB 1482
1.There is concern that no fault evictions are
occurring to avoid impacts of AB 1482 before the
“just cause” requirement goes into effect on January
1, 2020
2.The Cities of Grover Beach, Los Angeles, San
Mateo, Redwood City, Daly City, Milpitas and others
have adopted emergency ordinances establishing
protections during the gap period
3.City of San Luis Obispo residents have requested
that Council adopt an emergency ordinance to put
into place “just cause” requirements to protect
tenants
4
Public Comment
Attachment A (CRLA, SLO Legal Service, SLO Legal
Assistance)
13 Reports in the City of SLO.
Experiencing higher volume of calls
Ordinance Provisions
1.Enactment of emergency “just cause” provisions in the
period between adoption of proposed ordinance until
January 1, 2020
a)The provisions allow for eviction for the following
circumstances:
i.When the tenant is “ just cause ” such as a breach of the
terms of the lease (Section 4 (b) (1) et seq).
ii.When there is “no fault” such as where the landlords
wants to move into the unit (Section 4(b) (2) et seq).
2.Adoption of rent limits consistent with those imposed by
AB 1482
6
Recommendation
1.Review and consider public correspondence and
testimony related to AB 1482
2.Consider the adoption of an Emergency Ordinance
approving “just cause” protections and rental
increase limits to be in effect immediately upon
introduction and adoption, until January 1, 2020.
1.Strike Section 4 (a) (2).
7
Alternatives
1.Consider public testimony and decline to adopt an
emergency ordinance
2.Confer with staff and revise the emergency
ordinance to reflect any policy changes to respond
to Council with direction and community input.
1.i.e. limit ordinance to “Just Cause” and strike Section 5.
3.Continue the matter to a future date and time
8