Chula Vista City Council considered an ordinance on Tuesday night to increase the rights of tenants and make eviction more difficult for landlords.
After hours of hearing opposition from landlords regarding its proposed Residential Landlord-Tenant law, the city council concluded without a decision or vote, saying more data and revisions are needed. A revised ordinance is expected to be considered by the City Council on July 12.
If approved, the ordinance would limit the reasons why a tenant could be evicted. No-fault evictions can happen when a property owner wants to make substantial renovations, remove the property from the rental market, or have a family member move into a unit.
The ordinance requires landlords to give a 60-day notice and provide relocation assistance to tenants. Landlords must provide displaced tenants with two months' worth of fair market rent, and three months for those who are elderly or disabled.
Those in opposition have called the proposal excessive and unnecessary, including the Southern California Rental Housing Association (SCRHA).
“The City of Chula Vista’s proposal is unneeded and unfairly seeks to punish tens of thousands of hard-working housing providers for the actions of two bad landlords. It uses a sledgehammer where a scalpel is more appropriate,” SCRHA Executive Director Alan Pentico said in a statement.
The ordinance requires landlords to prioritize displaced tenants for consideration if a property is taken off the market and offered again within two years. The ordinance also created anti-harassment rules regulating how landlords could speak to tenants.
City Councilmember Jill Galvez cited the City’s data from the Legal Aid Society of San Diego, which showed that “no-fault” eviction disputes involve fewer than .27 percent of the 33,000 rental homes in Chula Vista annually.
Mayor of Chula Vista Mary Salas supports the ordinance but acknowleged the arguments on both sides.
“Many, many people on both sides, who are advocating for their position, but whenever this ordinance comes back, nobody is going to be happy with it. You know, the tenant advocates want more, and the housing providers want less. I think it is going to be a toss-up and I think there's going to be a lot of discussions, and I don't think we are all on the same page, but we shall see tonight,” said Salas.
