HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2.B 02/12/2018Agenda Item #2.B
1854'
DATE:
February 12, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John C. Brown City Manager
SUBJECT: Housing Workshop
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council consider options to:
1. Provide for short-term housing of persons displaced by the Sonoma Complex fire;
2. Increase the quantity and affordability of housing stock;
3. Consider adopting a Just Cause Evictions ordinance for Petaluma; and
4. Provide policy direction as appropriate.
BACKGROUND
This report assumes the reader is familiar with the terms and concepts used. To provide definitions
would be unwieldy for the present need, which is an initial consideration of policy options. The
City Council will be familiar with terms and concepts. A review of the City's 2015 -2023 Housing
Element may be of assistance to the lay reader, and provides background with respect to the City's
past performance and current housing policy.
The affordability of housing in Petaluma has long been of interest to Petaluma City Councils, but
increased as the real estate market recovered at the end of the Recession. City programs have done
much to provide housing for every income level, with emphasis on first -time home - buyers,
verylow, low and moderate income residents, and the homeless, all when funding was more
plentiful.
Housing affordability was part of Council goal discussions in January 2017. The Council
determined to review housing - related development impact fees to generate funding for affordable
housing projects, and adopted the priority, "Identify and implement programs to increase affordable
housing ", in its 2017 and 2018 goals. A task included with this priority is "seek to provide housing
for all income levels ".
The Sonoma Complex fires in October 2017 destroyed thousands of homes in Santa Rosa and the
unincorporated County, leaving many thousands displaced. This additional demand for housing
further impacts the availability and affordability of regional housing. Petaluma's most recent
analysis of vacancy rates for rental housing, which focuses on multi - family facilities of 30 units or
more, shows 35 vacant units - a vacancy rate of approximately 1 percent.
Protecting the affordability of rental housing and the rights of tenants, through rent control and with
restrictions on eviction, is also important to many in the community. Advocates discussed renter
protections with the City Council during the January 2017 goal setting session. Although the
Council did not wish to pursue Citywide rent control, several Councilmembers indicated openness
to further discussion of protecting renters from unjust evictions. The demand for rental protections
has intensified following the fires.
Until 2012, the City was able to partner with non - profits to build affordable housing projects. A list
of housing achievements through 2014 is provided as Attachment 1. Petaluma was able to address
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets set by the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) for very low, low, moderate, and above moderate housing for Petaluma
including housing for seniors. Petaluma's primary source of funding was the 20 percent set -aside
required of the City's Redevelopment Agency (Redevelopment) which generated about $3 million
annually. Petaluma established development impact fees: housing in -lieu and commercial linkage
fees, which supplemented Redevelopment funding. The City also asks housing developers to
include affordable housing in market -rate developments (inclusionary housing). Affordable
housing can also be obtained through density bonuses; increasing the number of units of housing
that can be built, in exchange for affordable housing units. The affordability of projects,
inclusionary units and density bonus units are protected by long -term agreements, typically a
minimum of 30 years. These are monitored for compliance, and are renewable.
Targets for inclusionary housing are 15 percent of the total units, and can be built on- or off -site.
Although the Council can require inclusionary housing under certain circumstances, the choice to
build inclusionary housing or pay housing fees has been largely optional. The cost to build one
unit of affordable housing in Petaluma was estimated last year at $376,000. The housing in -lieu fee
is set on a sliding scale, dependent on square footage. But, for illustration, fees collected on a 2,000
square foot unit amount to $9,022. Commercial linkage fees differ between construction types, but
average $2.93 per sq. ft. between all categories. To compare the cost of building to paying fees: the
inclusionary requirement for a subdivision with 100 homes of 2,000 square feet each is 15 units. At
$376,000 per unit, this would cost the developer $5.64 million to build. The in -lieu fee, at $9,022
per unit, would cost the developer $0.9 million. Most developers have chosen to pay the fees.
Redevelopment funding was abolished in 2012. Since 2012, impact fees are the City's primary
remaining source to subsidize affordable housing. Annual collection of these fees depends on the
amount and type of development activity, and is estimated at $1.24 million for 2017/18.
In addition to the long -term affordability guarantees associated with publically financed projects,
the City provides tenant protection through its mobile home park rent control program. The
program protects residents who have not entered into long -term leases with the park owner, and is
operated for the City by the County of Sonoma. City staff manages the program, and communicates
regularly with park residents, owners, and the County. Petaluma has a total of 868 mobile home
spaces, which are considered part of our affordable housing stock. Of that total, 352 are subject to
rent control. Owners may increase rents annually, using an increase factor based on the - Consumer
Price Index (CPI). Increases greater than CPI, or more frequent than annually, require an arbitration
hearing. The program is budgeted in 2017/18 at $14,000. Actual costs depend on the number, and
length of hearings.
2
The loss of Redevelopment revenues has cut funding for staffing. Two positions are allocated to
Housing and only one is funded. The Housing Division has also supported a portion of the cost of a
Senior Planner to assist with Housing Element compliance and long range planning. Less of these
services are being purchased. Staff costs are apportioned to the various program budgets.
Increasing the activities conducted by the Housing division will require additional staff and more
revenue.
DISCUSSION
This section addresses four subject areas, temporary emergency housing to alleviate displacement of
victims of the Sonoma Complex fires, housing affordability, housing supply, and renter protections.
Temporary, Emergency Housing
Directly affected by the fires, the City of Santa Rosa and the County of Sonoma have considered
and taken a number of actions to address the need for emergency housing. It's been suggested that
other Sonoma County cities adopt emergency measures to alleviate the need for emergency
housing. In October, November, and December 2017, the County considered options to provide
emergency housing. Urgency actions adopted by the County were:
• A moratorium on the issuance of short term vacation rentals.
• Suspension of occupancy limits on seasonal farmworker housing, to extend from 180 to 365
days a year.
• Rental of existing guest houses and pool houses for interim housing for fire victims.
• Rental of existing promotional or marketing accommodations, farmstays, bed & breakfast
inns, resorts, retreats, camps or other similar uses for interim housing.
• Fee waivers for accessory dwellings for:
1. Building and zoning permit fees.
2. Development fees up to 750 s.f. —waived; Development fees up to 751 -1000 s.f. —
50% of the fee.
• Safe Parking — at designated county -owned facilities, managed independently of the
County. Displaced persons have registration priority.
• Safe Parks on privately -owned sites. Permission by the owner with approval by Sonoma
County Community Development Commission.
• Recreational vehicles can be used as housing under certain criteria listed in the ordinance.
• Recreational vehicles, tent camps, and campgrounds permitted in Recreation and Visitor-
Serving Commercial Districts, with requirements for sewer, water and electrical hookups.
• Residential use of recreational vehicles and manufactured homes for temporary emergency
housing in public facilities and industrial zones.
• Expansion of existing mobile home parks — subject to issuance of zoning permit.
• Use and rental of existing dwellings and recreational vehicles on agricultural parcels as long
as it meets the standards for sewer, water, and electrical.
• Temporary use of manufactured homes on fire damaged lots by displaced persons.
Many of these provisions are in effect until December 2019. The moratorium on vacation rentals is
set for reconsideration later this month.
Healdsburg, Windsor, Sebastopol and Cloverdale also took actions in 2017 to provide temporary
emergency housing for those displaced by the fires. These extend from one to two years, depending
on the city, and include:
Healdsburg
• Vehicles generally used for human habitation and tiny houses may be parked and occupied
on private property.
• Increased allowable area of an accessory dwelling unit up to a maximum of 850 square feet
and 2 bedrooms.
Attached and detached garages on single - family dwelling lots 6,000 square feet or larger
may be converted to an accessory dwelling unit or bedroom and are not required to provide
additional parking or replacement parking for the primary unit.
Every effort will be made to review accessory dwelling units within 60 days of submittal of
a complete application to the building division.
Windsor
• One trailer., manufactured home or similar structure, or recreational vehicle may be located
on developed residential properties.
• A recreational vehicle may also be allowed in the front driveway area of the property
provided that it does not encroach into the public right -of -way when parked.
• Use of an existing residential accessory structure, such as a pool house, guest house,
recreation room or studio space.
• Multiple units on developed residential properties, not to exceed maximum allowable
density.
• Temporary units on vacant residential properties, not to exceed maximum allowable density.
• Temporary units may be placed on vacant commercial properties, but not on developed
commercial properties.
• Temporary expansion of existing emergency shelter uses.
• Temporary expansion of Wine Country RV Park.
Sebastopol
• One travel trailer or recreational vehicle may park on private residential property, for a
maximum of 18 months (with conditions).
Cloverdale
• One mobile home trailer, travel trailer, house car, or tiny house can be parked on private
residential property for a two -year period (subject to conditions).
• 6 residential units may be located on the ground floor of a commercial property.
The actions on these lists come with a range of strict conditions, which provide for health, safety,
and community protections. For example, requirements for connection to water, sewer and
electrical services; lot coverage and set -back requirements; waterway and tree protection; building
and fire safety permitting and inspection; and refuse collection, to name the more common
conditions. These all require some level of enforcement, initially or ongoing.
Some County of Sonoma actions are specific to the unincorporated area, such as farmworker
housing; agricultural zoning; and farm stays, resorts, and camps. Likewise, some of what the
4
County has done, like Santa Rosa, is specific to parcels affected by the fires. These provisions are
not applicable to Petaluma.
Actions taken by other jurisdictions were by urgency ordinance, and date to October, November,
and December 2017. Some extensions were approved last month, but no new actions. Actions
taken by communities farther from the burned area are less extensive than those that are closer.
Petaluma staff has not quantified how much displacement these actions have alleviated, how much
relief is still needed, or how much relief Petaluma can provide by taking similar actions. It seems
probable displaced residents have connections to jobs, schools, and the like in the Santa Rosa area,
and will want to locate as closely there as they can. Petaluma's relative distance from Santa Rosa
and from burned areas may make it less attractive as an emergency housing location. As well,
Petaluma neighborhoods are sensitive to encroachment into setbacks, on- street parking, recreational
vehicles parked in public right of ways, and increased traffic. Accordingly, it is recommended the
Petaluma City Council consider a limited number of options, for a shorter period of time — 12
months. If demand for additional emergency housing or time is shown, the Council can add to this
list when that may be necessary. Recommended for your consideration are:
Rental of existing guest houses, pool houses for interim housing for fire victims.
One recreational vehicle or travel trailer may be allowed on a residential property, industrial
or business park property provided:
o it does not encroach into the public right -of -way when parked.
o is permitted by applicable CC &R's.
o is properly connected to water, sewer, and electric services (the use of a generator is
prohibited).
o the user of the vehicle has obtained consent from the property owner prior to parking
the vehicle.
o it is parked a minimum of 20 feet from a habitable building on an adjacent property.
o it is a model year 1998 or newer.
o it shall include working fire extinguisher, working smoke detector and working
carbon monoxide detector.
o a temporary occupancy permit has been granted by the Building Official, contingent
upon satisfaction of all other requirements.
Conditions recommended for RV parking are similar to those adopted in other communities. Given
the neighborhood sensitivities previously noted, it is recommended consideration of these two
actions occur in conjunction with noticed hearings, to provide for adequate public input.
The Council may also wish to consider:
• A moratorium on the issuance of short term vacation rentals; and
• Development impact fee waivers for accessory dwelling units
The City's short -term vacation rental program requires operators to obtain permits and pay transient.
occupancy tax. Operator compliance with those requirements has been limited. The City has
contracted to identify, notify, and require those operating without permits to come into compliance.
Approximately 80 non - permitted rentals were identified, around 20 have obtained permits. It is
recommended the Council does not establish a moratorium on vacation rentals, but rather allows
this process to continue until the City has registered and received permit fees, and transient
occupancy taxes from all known operators.
With respect to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), Petaluma has already taken several steps to
encourage their construction. We increased the maximum size to 720 square feet, which is more
accommodating of multiple residents. We relaxed parking requirements; ADUs need not provide
parking if they are within �/z mile of a transit hub, in a historic district, or within one block of a car -
share; and development impact fees are discounted from those charged to a single family dwelling
unit (SDU). SDUs currently pay about $41,459 in impact fees. ADU's pay approximately $12,100.
The City is also allowing junior accessory dwelling units, those that are inside an existing housing
unit. Those have no off - street parking requirements, and are not assessed for impact fees.
These steps appear to be working, 13 ADU's were permitted last year and 3 are currently in process.
It is not clear that additional relaxation of requirements is necessary to, or would encourage, an
increase in the numbers of ADU's being built. Council could go farther, and waive impact fees on
ADUs. This is not recommended, as the City's fee program does not provide for waivers, and fees
would need to be paid from the General Fund, or Housing funds. The Council could also widen the
area in which parking is not required, by increasing the number of transit locations from which
distances are measured, or simply eliminate parking requirements for all ADU's.
No other changes related to emergency housing are recommended at this time.
Housing Affordability
Petaluma's adopted 2015 -23 Housing Element contains policies and actions to increase housing
affordability, some of which were codified in December 2014 and are tools currently available to
developers. Some of the opportunities identified in the Housing Element to encourage affordable
housing include:
• Reduced parking standards
• Second units (ADU's)
• Density, bonuses and other incentives
• Inclusionary housing
• Expedited project review for below - market projects
• Subsidies for affordable housing
Since 2012, housing fees are our primary source to subsidize affordable housing. The estimate from
both fee sources this fiscal year is about 1/3 of the annual amount Redevelopment provided. A
portion of the impact fees supports program costs and non - profit partners. If all fees collected were
banked, and used to build affordable housing projects, it would still take several years to accumulate
the funding needed to make a project work for non -profit developers. Accordingly, the City
Council determined to review these fees during the 2017 and 2018 goal period.
A fee study was completed in 2017, and a workshop to consider changes to the City's housing fee
structures was conducted with the Council in October 2017. The fee study justified significant
increases for both housing in -lieu and commercial linkage fees, and provides a calculation for a new
housing impact fee. The Council was mindful of the effect fee increases would have on
6
development, on the sale price of homes, and on rents, and determined to proceed conservatively
with any changes. The Council appeared open to increasing the housing in -lieu fee from the
average of $9,022 for a 2000 square foot home to $15,180, and to adjust the commercial linkage fee
to an amount similar to that charged by Sonoma County. The Council indicated a strong interest in
requiring inclusionary housing wherever permitted by law, and increasing the percentage from 15 to
20 if the inclusionary housing is provided off -site. Housing fees will return to the City Council at
its March 5, 2018 meeting for further review and what is expected to be the final direction to
implement fee changes effective July 1, 2018.
The City's development impact fee structure is project- based, and those projects were identified as
necessary to mitigate the impacts identified in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Fee
waivers and reductions are one means of incentivizing private developers to build affordable
housing. Petaluma does not offer these because of how our fees are structured. The City could,
through the General Fund or through Housing fees, supplant some portion of these fees for private
housing projects, in exchange for affordable units, but the General Fund does not have the fiscal
capacity to do so. Housing funds are very limited, and have been used to -date to support
partnerships with non - profits. As well, fee waivers and subsidies will subject developers to
prevailing wage standards, which can significantly increase the cost of construction, diminishing or
negating the positive effect of a waiver or subsidy. A policy consideration for the Council,
however, is whether you want to use housing fees to incentivize private development.
Petaluma currently incentivizes affordable housing through density bonuses. The City's density
bonus ordinance was updated in 2014 and allows for up to a 35% increase in density consistent with
State law. This applies to those areas outside of the Central Petaluma Specific Plan area. Within
the Central Petaluma Specific Plan there is no upper limit to density so there is no need for a density
bonus. As a policy matter, the Council could offer a bonus of greater than 35 %, although staff has
no information at this time to suggest a larger number would encourage more affordable housing
than does 35 %. A Zoning Ordinance amendment and General Plan amendment (Housing Element)
would be necessary to increase that percentage.
Housing Supply
ABAG sets our RHNA targets for new construction for very low, low, moderate, and above -
moderate income residents. State law also requires the City to develop projection of needs at each
of these income levels, and policies and programs to meet those needs. The 2015 -23 Housing
element provides a summary of those projections, and actions needed to address them. RHNA
allocations for 2015 -23 total 745 units. Of those, 423 are very low, low, or moderate income units.
A total of 334 units were built between 2015 and 2017. Nearly all were market rate units, 173
single family dwellings and 151 apartments. Ten units were built for moderate incomes. Adjusting
the targets to account for built units, the RHNA target for market rate housing, for the full 8 -year
period was met, leaving 413 very low, low, or moderate units to be built over the next five years.
A review of projects that are currently under construction, have received entitlements, or are in the
approval pipeline (Attachment 2) shows 2,061 units will come on -line during the 2015 -23 planning
horizon. Of these, 879 are single family units, and 1,282 are multi - family units. Within this, 75
units are inclusionary housing. In addition, the City is partnering with two non - profits, by
providing land, to build an additional 53 units of affordable senior /veteran's housing, and 40 single
7
family homes, 30 of which would be for -sale below - market housing. Applications for these two
projects are not yet complete, but are expected soon, and will be expedited.
Applying this new construction to our housing targets, total new construction exceeds the RHNA
target for market rate housing by 1,988 units. The RHNA target for affordable housing is reduced
but not met, leaving 248 units still to be built. New construction also exceeds the revised City
projection for market rate housing, by 174 units. There should be no shortage of market rate
housing at the end of the planning period, but more work is needed to encourage below - market rate
housing. Increasing the housing impact fees will meet some of that need, but making development
less costly, through process and legislative improvements, and making more space available for
housing development, can also help.
Since 2009, when M -Group was engaged to provide current planning services to the City, staff has
worked to streamline the development review process, which can reduce the overall cost of
development and decrease the time required to complete build units. Some of these changes are no
longer recent, and may not come immediately to mind:
• Implemented a Development Review Committee: Collaborative weekly meetings to
coordinate among departments, provide initial concept feedback to applicants, to problem
solve, and to provide predictability and ensure consistency in review process.
• Established a consent agenda for the Planning Commission (PC): facilitates small project
review of design modifications conditioned by PC.
• Eliminated preliminary Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR). SPAR approvals for'
projects that require both PC and City Council are now conditionally approved by PC so
projects do not need to return after Council approves legislative items.
• Completeness reviews are conducted within 30 -days for nearly all entitlement projects
• Administrative reviews are conducted by staff for Minor Use Permits (and simple SPAR),
eliminating public hearings and resulting in savings of time and cost to applicants.
• A warrants process is utilized for code deviations for projects subject to the SmartCode.
That review is incorporated into the SPAR process.
• Public Hearings: Staff guides projects to increase likelihood of passage at public hearing.
Overall, the number of public hearings per project has decreased. Many projects receive
approval from PC at first public hearing.
• Templates were developed to allow for efficient production of CEQA clearance documents
such as Initial Studies/Negative Declarations and documented Exemptions. They allow for
all CEQA work below the EIR level to be completed by our planning staff rather than
outside consultants. This saves time and money for applicants and allows projects to flow
through the process more smoothly.
• Planning staff also shortens processing times by completing certain technical studies in-
house rather than requiring sending out RFPs for specialized consultants. This includes
preparation of Historic Resource Evaluations and preliminary screening for Air Quality
hnpacts using adopted standards and available on -line modeling tools.
• Infill housing projects are environmentally cleared using Categorical Exemptions where
possible.
Petaluma voters established the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in 1998 to promote efficient use of
developable lands in the City and to prevent urban spraNvl. The UGB is in place until 2025, and has
been effective in achieving its goals. As a result, there is little "green field" left on which to build,
and future development will be in -fill. Infill development is becoming more difficult, due to
property constraints including access, floodplain or contamination issues, and exactions associated
with the City's planned transportation system, and neighborhood opposition to increased traffic or
other quality of life concerns. Some of these constraints, such as flood plain issues or
contamination, may essentially render a property un- buildable. In any case, overcoming these
constraints adds to the cost of development, and impacts housing affordability. These constraints, in
effect, result in a shortage of buildable land.
Petaluma anticipated this shortage and addressed it through mixed -use zoning. The zoning
designation combines uses on the same parcel, and is generally envisioned as vertical in nature. For
example, commercial retail on a ground floor, office space on a second floor, and residential units
above. This is an urban development pattern, and is not always consistent with the product types
developers believe consumers want, or is supported by present market conditions. There currently
exists high demand for housing. This is less the case for commercial retail space, or office space.
Developers have indicated an interest in changing mix towards housing that stands free of combined
uses, which the current mixed -use code does not typically allow.
Staff is now working on a zoning code amendment that will allow Residential uses in the MUIB
zoning district consistent with both General Plan policy and existing IZO regulatory text. This will
be a meaningful change to allow consideration of housing through a CUP process on several large
parcels where it currently cannot be built. This change would affect five separate areas, two of
which could be expected to be developed with housing in the current planning period (Attachment
3). This includes a potential 124 units at Deer Creek Village and 112 units at Corona Road/N.
McDowell site, for a potential total of approximately 236 units. This action is tentatively scheduled
for Planning Commission consideration on February 27, 2018, with City Council action to follow.
Planning staff is also currently working closely with Advanced Planning, the City Engineer, and the
City Attorney's Office to initiate the move toward traffic analyses based on Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) consistent with new state laws and policies to encourage urban infill. This will directly
affect nearly all development in Petaluma and will potentially allow for more streamlined traffic
analysis and encourage alternate modes of transport.
An opportunity identified in the Housing Element is "Residential redevelopment in other [zoning]
districts ". Discussed in that section is the ability, with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), to construct
housing above ground level in certain commercial districts. This option has not been aggressively
promoted by planning staff. Going forward, however, they will inform property owners and
applicants of projects involving shopping centers in C1 and C2 zones that housing is an allowed use
in most of them with approval of a CUP. This may open up some hidden housing opportunities.
Beyond that, it is recommended the City Council consider amendments to the zoning code to allow
housing to be built in a wider range of zoning, such as in business parks, and allowing it to be built
in commercial districts — including on the ground floor, utilizing the CUP process. There is space
on the upper floors in some of our older business parks that may lend itself to housing. This could
potentially house some of the employees working there or nearby. Larger empty spaces in shopping
centers may become much harder to fill as society shifts to more on -line buying. Allowing housing
there will maximize the use of existing space, increase wall ability, and support the City Council's
goal for an age - friendly community.
9
Importantly, re -use of existing space can reduce construction cost and increase housing
affordability. These changes would require changes to the Zoning Ordinance and potentially to the
General Plan.
Preparing for this workshop, staff was asked to provide suggestions as to policies and code changes
the Council can implement that would promote the construction of affordable housing. The
preceding lists, and suggestions, as well as the program of work included in the Housing Element,
are what has been suggested. This workshop provides the Council the opportunity to consider these
potential changes, as well as to suggest changes it may be thinking about.
Renter Protections
Housing advocates have approached the City Council seeking renter protections: Citywide rent
control, and Just Cause eviction legislation. The City Council has considered expanding the City's
mobile home park rent control program to include rental units on a Citywide basis, and has thus far
determined not to do so. The Costa Hawkins Act exempts properties built after 1995 from
regulation of rents. Much of the City's rental housing stock predates 1995, and the Council has
been reluctant to implement protections that apply to only a segment of renters by virtue of the age
of the unit they happen to be renting. As well, staffing and program costs are a serious
consideration. With the dissolution of Redevelopment, funding no longer exists to support more
than the costs of the City's existing rent control program. Citywide rent control would require a
significant increase in staffing resources and costs, for which no dedicated funding source exists.
Effort is currently underway to implement rent control on a statewide basis. That effort, if
successful, could provide rental protection without action at the local level.
More recently, housing advocates have approached the Council urging adoption of Just Cause
eviction legislation. In essence, Just Cause means that a landlord may not terminate a tenancy, or
refuse to renew a lease, for any reason other than one that is allowed by the ordinance. Examples of
reasons for cause would include nonpayment of rent, intentional damage to the rental, or the
presence of unauthorized occupants. Because rents are not regulated, the Costa Hawkins Act does
not apply to Just Cause evictions. While Just Cause legislation has been sought from other
jurisdictions in Sonoma County, none have thus far adopted an ordinance.
In reviewing the issue, staff learned that some form of this regulation now exists in 17 California
communities. Nearly all, of this regulation appears to be linked to rent control. Staff identified two .
cities, Glendale and San Diego, that do not regulate rents but have enacted eviction protections.
Both ordinances require a landlord to state in the termination notice the reason that justifies the
termination, and both ordinances are well over a decade in age — and as such have stood the test of
time. Of the two, Glendale's appears the stronger. Inasmuch as the Council has indicated it does
not want to expand Petaluma's rent control activities, one of these two ordinances might provide the
model for a Petaluma ordinance, if the Council wishes to proceed in that direction.
Glendale
Glendale adopted its ordinance in 2002. It prohibits evictions that fall outside its stated allowable
causes, or exceptions, and prohibits retaliation against a tenant for asserting their rights under the
ordinance or State law. Its provisions, in summary, are:
1U
Just cause.
At the time landlord delivers a 30 -, 60 -, or 3 -day notice, landlord must also provide the tenant with
a written notice that recites the landlord's legal grounds for terminating the tenancy and tenant's
rights to relocations benefits, if applicable.
Reasons Allowed for Just Cause Evictions:
• Nonpayment of rent, breach of a "lawful obligation or covenant," nuisance, or illegal use of
the premises or permitting any illegal use within 1,000 feet of the unit. "Illegal use"
specifically includes all offenses involving illegal drugs, such as marijuana (without a
doctor's prescription).
• When an unauthorized subtenant not approved by the landlord is in possession at the end of
a lease term.
When a tenant refuses to allow the landlord access "as permitted or required by the lease or
by law ".
When the landlord offers a lease renewal of at least one year, serves a notice on the tenant of
the offer at least 90 days before the current lease expires, and the tenant fails to accept
within 30 days.
When the landlord plans to demolish the unit or perform work on it that costs at least eight
times the month's rent, and the tenant's absence is necessary for the repairs; or when the
landlord is removing the property from the rental market, or seeks to have a spouse,
grandparent, brother, sister, in -law, child or resident manager (if there is not an alternate unit
available) move into the unit. Under state law, these grounds may be used only if the
tenancy is month -to- month, and 30 or 60 days' written notice is given. The landlord must
pay the tenant relocation expenses of two months' rent for a comparable unit plus $1,000.
Exceptions:
Leases of one year or more.
Relocation:
Tenants entitled to relocation fee of twice the fair market rent, plus $1,000, in certain instances. In
an eviction lawsuit brought by the landlord to recover possession of the rental, the tenant may raise
as an affirmative defense the landlord's failure to abide by any provision of the ordinance.
Penalties:
The first two violations within a 12 -month period are treated as infractions. Fines of $250, and
$500, are imposed, respectively for these violations. A third violation in any one year period is
treated as a misdemeanor.
Glendale contracts with an independent partner, like our own Petaluma People Services Center
(PPSC), to administer this program, and prosecutes penalties internally. Staff was not able to
isolate the cost of this program. Discussions with PPSC suggest they might be able to operate this
program for about the same cost as our mobile home park rent control program. Prosecution of
violations would be administered by the City Attorney's Office.
San Diego
The City of San Diego's ordinance was adopted in 2004, and is titled "Tenants' Right to Know
Ordinance ". It states the reasons for which evictions can be made, for tenancies that have exceeded
two years in length, with exceptions. It does not provide for relocation assistance, or for penalties
associated with violations. Its provisions, in summary, are:
Just C',ause
At the time the landlord delivers a 30 -, 60 -, or 3 -day notice, the landlord must also provide the
tenant with a written notice that recites the landlord's legal grounds for terminating the tenancy.
Exceptions to the Ordinance
Institutional facilities, such as schools; government -owned or subsidized property subject to
substantially similar or great state or federal eviction controls; rentals to boarders in the landlord's
principal residence, where landlord and tenant share facilities; hotel, motel, rooming house rentals
that are not single -room occupancy hotel rooms; mobile homes; transient occupancies. Does not
apply to tenancies of less than two years.
San Diego provides Fair Housing services through Legal Aid Society of San Diego. With respect to
eviction issues, Legal Aid provides advice, including whether the Landlord is complying with their
ordinance. Tenants who believe they are being unjustly evicted will cause a landlord to go through
the unlawful detainer procedure through the courts. Legal Aid takes cases for tenants who are
dealing with unlawful detainer issues.
Reasons Allowed for Just Cause Evictions
• Refusal to give the landlord reasonable access to the rental unit for the purpose of making
repairs or improvements, or for the purpose of inspection as permitted or required by the
lease or by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to prospective purchaser or
mortgagee.
• Nonpayment of rent, violation of a "a lawful and material obligation or covenant of the
tenancy," commission of a nuisance or illegal use of the premises.
• Refusal "after written request of a landlord" to sign a lease renewal; "for a further term of
like duration with similar provisions."
• To make necessary repairs or perform construction when removing the tenant is reasonably
necessary to do the job, provided the landlord has obtained all necessary permits from the
city.
• When the landlord intends to withdraw all rental units in all buildings or structures on a
parcel of land from the rental market, or when the landlord, a spouse, parent, grandparent,
brother, sister, child, grandchild, or a resident manager plans to occupy the rental unit.
These grounds may be used only if the tenancy is month to month (under state law, you're
entitled to 60 days' written notice).
In considering Just Cause eviction legislation, if the Council wishes to proceed in that direction,
staff recommends a structure that provides effective protection, but minimizes staff time and cost to
the City. From the staff perspective, legislation that creates a civil cause of action would be ideal;
one where the City has no direct responsibility for enforcement or administration, that provides the
tenant a legal tool that can be used by them in court. We found no such model as we researched the
X
issue, and would need to develop one for the City. The policy questions for the City Council at this
time are, does the Council wish to proceed with Just Cause legislation, if so, using one of the
Glendale or San Diego models, or task staff with developing legislation that creates a civil cause of
action without direct City involvement.
Housing is a broad subject and much was not discussed in this report. It includes specific
recommendations, but is also intended to create opportunities for the Council to make changes in
our current policies, practices, and provisions. Our Senior Planner in charge of advanced planning,
our Housing Administrator, representatives of M- Group, and the City Attorney will join me in
attending the February 12, 2018 workshop to answer questions you may have and to engage in
dialog regarding housing in Petaluma.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
Once the Council has indicated its policy preferences, cost estimates can be developed. As noted
elsewhere in this report, City staffing and funding for additional housing - related activities and
programs is very limited and would need to be augmented if policy choices intensify City program
responsibilities.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Exhibit C of Petaluma's 2015 -23 Housing Element
2. Summary of Current Projects with Housing Components
3. Map —MU1B Sites
4. Just Cause and Retaliatory Conviction Ordinance, Glendale, CA
5. Tenants' Right to Know Regulations, San Diego, CA
13
ATTACHMENT 1
APPENDIX C —Affordable Housing- Achievements
PROJECTS:
CONSTRUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING through 2014
Daiiiel'Drive
8 Low /Mori
Units
$120,900
Burbank ,..
, 1990
Apartments
5 Very Low
Donated
$50,000
PI-I'll
19'80
Wilson Street I a'
10 Very. Low
CDBG
$85,000
PEP
1984
Lindberg Lane Senior
12 Very Low
Units
$580,000
Burbank
1991
Apartments
4 Lo-,x,
Donated
$5901000
PEI?
1986.
Wilson Street 11
6 Very Low
CDBG
$335,000
PEP
1988
IvIndrone Village 23 Ven, Lori. 'Hsg Fund $250,000
LIHTC -9 Burbank 1988
Magnolia Hills 32 Low /Mod Hsg-Fund $140,000 Burbank 1988
Madison Mahon
8 Low /Mori
CDBG
$120,900
Burbank ,..
, 1990
FTFIB
Cherry Hills
Townhomes
29 Low /Mod
Hsg Fund
$580,000
Burbank
1991
Mountain Vic v. Senioi
16 VI_- Senior
Hsg Fund
674,000
PEP " "
1991
Apts.
4 Disabled
CDBG
155,000
\V
4 LO - �enror
Caulfield Lane Senior
22 Very Low
Hsg Fund
400,000
PEP
1992
Apts.
Senior
CDBG
124,500
{
LIHTC
Hitiview,Oaks
30 Lom, /
Land Don.
500,000
Burbank
1992
Townhomes
Noderate
Fisg Fund
50,000,
VVashington Creek
32 Very Low /
Hsg Fund
320,000
Eden
1993
Apts_
Low
LIHTC
-
Corona Ranch
74 Very Low /
Land Don.
720,000
Eden
1994
Low
L11-ITC-9
Corona Crescent
16 Low /.
Land
80,000
Eden
199
Moderate
Donation
Part; Lane Apartments % VeLy Low Hsg Fund
/Love I-IUD -Title 6 $295,000 Burbank 1994
Vallejo Street I Senior 44 Very Low / Hsg Fund 851,800 PEP 1994
Apts. Low Senior LIHTC -9
1
Appendix C — Affordable Housing Achievements
IL
Wisteria'
28 Low /
Land Don.
1,100,000
Burbank
1996
disalilc d
Moderate
Hsg Fund
250,000
D.owntown River
80 — Very Low
BEGIN
.280,000"
240 Very Low
Hsg Fund
Round Wall: Village
129 Very Low /
Hsg Fund
933,000
Burbank
1996
' Apts.
Low
CDBG
110,000
890,0 0
PEP 2001'
Apartments
Seniors
HOME
930,500
PEP' ��
w
Duple
HUD 202
LIHTC -4
Old Elm Village"
87 — Very Low
Sunrise = of Petaluma
15 Very Lo1�r %
Bond Issue,
Private
1 997.
51,. ?,pts:
Low;Senior
Hsg Fluid
480,200
HOME
800,000
.Vallejo Street II Senior
40 Very Low /"
Hsg Fund
532,900
PEP
1998
Ants.
Low Senior
LIHTC -9
Delco
2007
alishrui Apariments
1 > - Verb liar
Hsg Ttund
368;380
NBRS' , 1999
disalilc d
CDBG `.
X5,000
D.owntown River
80 — Very Low
Hsg Fund
Vintage Chateau
240 Very Low
Hsg Fund
$10,000
USA Prop '2000
Senior Apartments
And Low
".
Edith Street Sensor
22 —Very IoW-
Hsg Fund
890,0 0
PEP 2001'
Apartments
Seniors
HOME funds
340,000
PEP' ��
w
Duple
HUD 202
Old Elm Village"
87 — Very Low
Hsg Fund
1,331,600
Burbank 2001
and Low Income
CDBG
349,500
income for
Hsg Fluid
480,200
HOME
800,000
LI14TC -9
7Xpartmel]ts
seniors
NUN -11: runcls
rJI,VJU
HUD.202"
D.owntown River
80 — Very Low
Hsg Fund
3,662,000
Eden
2005
Apartments
and Low income
HOME Fund
3,466,000
LIHTC - 4
1"fe Dowell Bled.
2 —Low
Hsg Fund
$7.5 000
PEP' ��
2006
Duple
Boulevard Apartments
14 — Vet- T low
Land Don.
Buckelew
2006
income for
Hsg Fluid
480,200
Programs
mentally disabled
HUD 811
Frates Scjuare
26— Moderate
Land
Delco
2007
Income
Donation
Bldrs and
Flousinc
Land Trust
Residential Sites Inventory Analysis
2
1 G
Casa Grande Senior
57 — Very low and
Hsg Fund
1,664,000
Apartments
low income-
HOME
3,950,000
PEP 2009
seniors
HUD 202
LIHTC -4
Vintage Clzate' RWII
67'- Very Low
Ilsg Fund
4,500,000.
USA Prop 2012
and Lou income' '
LIFITC -4
seniors ('55 +)
Logan Place Apts
6:5 ELI, Very Low
Hsg Fund
3,650,000
Burbank 2013
and Low income
HOME
4,000,000
Housing
family rental
MHP
6,000,000
LIHTC -4
Kellgren SeniorApts
49 Very lom, and
Hsg Fund
1,600,000
PEP 2014,
low 'income senior
H, UD 202
LIHTC -4
Total
1,417 units
3
Appendix C — Affordable Housing Achievements
ZAP
FIRST -TIME HOMEBUYERS ASSISTANCE:
Silent Second Mortgage- 210 FIousing Iyund $12;0 9,358. Nj /A' 1 ,88 -On-
FTI-iB tow/Mod going
Mortgage Credit 150 Low / Housing Fund $ 10,000 N/A 1991-On-
Certificate Mod. going
Lo�vfll�Ioc1
CONSERVED UNITS:
Residential Sites Inventory Analysis
4
1
Homeless/Transitional
15
1-lousing
100,000 /yr
COTS
On -going
Shelter — Families
beds /night
Fund
As funding
32 Trans, Hsg
allows
Housing Rehabilitation'-
beds
CDBG
200,000 /yr
Rebuilding,
On -going
Homeless /Transitional
100
Housing
100,000 /yr
COTS
On -going
Shelter — Singles - MIC
beds /night
Fund
as funding
,IVI. Horne Rent
41 Trans. Hsg
Hsg Fund :'
allows
On -going
'Stabilisation
beds
sustmning ,
Rental Assiaance Programs
200
Hsg Fluid •
41 j509/37.1
PPSC
On -going
hholds /yr,
CDBG
as fundinng
allows
Housing Rehabilitation'-
35 hholds /yr.
CDBG
200,000 /yr
Rebuilding,
On -going
Low, moderate, senior and
as funding
Together
disabled
allows
,IVI. Horne Rent
317 units
Hsg Fund :'
Self
On -going
'Stabilisation
under the
sustmning ,
ordinance
Fair Housing
250 persons
Hsg Fund
50,000 /yr.
PPSC
On -going
annually
as funding
allows
Meal Prograin for seniors
212 persons
CDBG
53,000/yr ''
PPSC
On -going
annually
as funding
allows
Boys and Girls Club of
250 persons
Hsg Fund
400,000 as.
B &GC
On -going
Petaluma
annually
funding
allows
5'
Appendix C — Affordable Housing Achievements
•
) I O O N 0 0 0 0 0
fLl
N O O O O
.�-I t I co H �
H c-I M H
LL
N
O d' 00 00 1*
H ri W I, n
ri c-I N
U.
(n 0 Ln 0 0 0 0 0
w N w w N N N N
U U U U U U u U
O O O O O O O O
a d d d d d d d
C C C C C C C C
h c c c c c c c c
7 to co to t0 c0 co c0 l6
4� d d d d d d d d
m L
E d 41
L
_� j 0 3 Q.
t0 O p N O
a v L t7 c�= a
t d w L m y ,>
N (d L G (1) �-
O N p � -�'e O
s�. J N p O J O
r-I 00 Ln U �_ "O In E
M l0 ri l0 C ri O
Q ri m N cI w m a
ti0
C hA
C
— -a
V
m � �
E
L ,_ 4-
O M v N C
Ln
O Q 4=- 0 (u O
X Q v O E a
L to U 0 0 v
N _ c 0=
O =
-,e N O C Q)
N+� ..O O L N
ro � V) U m
E O ca ? ru O rp
a O z E O in Ln CO
cf O d d
Ln O N N
LG ri
O 0,0 O
L L L L
iZ IZ iZ Q
IZ I? IZ a
Q Q Q Q
O
S_
.c
.a cn
L
CL Q w
O O CL LO
0 N
G = W 00
C O LO I,
= O O r-i
(n to d 00
N
C
CO
CC
C
O
U
i_
cn O
O to
— � C
O O U n
N O
m
cn cr- CO w
O N Ln O O N O O O
r-I 01
C
00
C
C C
N
r-I
01 Ln
O
O O
I�
N
r-I
U V
U
U
U
N
O
v
c
ca
c
On
L L
L
L
RP �
0)
N N
N
O
y
N N
V-1 H
C
C
H
H
U
c C
C
C
C
C C
O O
O
O
O
O O
U V
U
U
U
V V
O
v
c
ca
c
L L
L
L
L
L L
N N
N
N
y
N N
C C
C
C
C
C C
U
O
U U U
U
U
U
M
U
L L
L
L
L
L L
N N
N
N
OJ
N 4]
UC1
N
c
G
4,
c:
p
00 Ln
R* n
M 00
000 00
d' N
ri
J
Z
V
ATTACHMENT 2
I
Iq
L
L
N
c0
c
O
v
c
ca
c
C
N
O
v
a-�
�U
U
O
A
O
M
O
m
ON
N
c
UC1
N
c
G
4,
c:
p
N
L
Q cu
w
E
Q
O
U
N
E
O
F
c
_
U
f6
4N
L
L
CL
�p
tO i
Q
O
U
Q
c
@
C
L
f6
O
i
O
L
N
—
=3
+
�
"
I�
M
m
�
Q
Q
d Q
00 Ln
R* n
M 00
000 00
d' N
ri
J
Z
V
ATTACHMENT 2
I
Iq
M
H
z
w
x
v
H
H
Chapter- 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS
Glendale Municipal Code
[No Frames
Title 9 PUBLIC PEACE AND WELFARE
Chapter 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS
9.30.010 Legislative purpose._
It is found and declared that there is an increasing demand for rental housing in the city of Glendale
which has resulted in a critically low vacancy factor. In addition, an increasing number of residential rental
housing units have substandard living conditions and reduced services. Tenants who have complained
about substandard Living conditions and /or a reduction in services have been threatened with eviction, and
oftentimes have been evicted. Other tenants are fearful of eviction and, as a result, fail to complain about
substandard living conditions. This circumstance is disruptive to a stable living environment and has a
detrimental effect on the substantial numbers of renters in the city, particularly senior citizens, those with,
low or moderate incomes and persons on fixed incomes.
It is further found and declared that in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens
of Glendale and to ensure that all residents of the city have a safe, habitable, well- maintained and stable
housing environment, without the fear of reprisal, the city council enacts this chapter, and encourages
property owners to provide well- maintained living units and discourage retaliatory evictions. It is vitally
important that landlords provide for the care, upkeep and maintenance of residential rental units so that
they meet and continue to meet minimum housing standards, particularly for those members of the
community on limited or fixed incomes who are least able to protect themselves from retaliation, are least
able to find replacement housing and who will accept substandard conditions due to the fear of termination
of their tenancy. (Ord. 5326, 2002)
e
9.30.020 Definitions.
Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined in this chapter shall have the following
meanings and govern the construction of this chapter.
"Eviction" means any action taken by the landlord to remove a tenant involuntarily from a rental unit
and terminate.the tenancy, whether pursuant to a notice to quit, or by judicial proceedings, or otherwise.
"Landlord" means any person, partnership, corporation, family trust or other business entity offering
for rent or.lease any residential property in this city.
"Rental complex" means one or more buildings used in whole or in part for residential purposes,
located on a single lot, contiguous lots, or lots separated only by 'a street or alley.
"Rental unit" means a dwelling unit available for rent in the city of Glendale together with the land
and appurtenant buildings thereto and all housing services, privileges and facilities provided in connection
with the use or occupancy thereof, which unit is located in the structure or complex containing a multiple
dwelling, boarding house or lodging house.
The term "rental unit" shall not include the following: rooms or accommodations in hotels, boarding
houses or lodging houses which are rented to transient guests for a period of less than sixty (60) days;
housing accommodations in a hospital, convent, monastery, church, religious facility, extended care facility,
asylum, non - profit home for the aged; dormitories owned and operated by an institution of higher education,
or a high school or elementary school; rental units located on a parcel containing two or fewer dwelling
units; rental units owned or operated by any government agency or whose rent is subsidized by any
government agency, including but not limited to Section 8 housing- subsidies; rental units that require intake,
case management or counseling as part of the occupation, and an occupancy agreement; or when the
landlord complies with Section 9.30.032 of this chapter.
http: / /gcode.us/ codes /glendale /view.plip ?topic =9 -9 30 &showAll= 1 &fi-ames =on
1/16/2018
Chapter 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS
Page 2 of 7
"Tenant" means a person entitled by a written or oral agreement or by sufferance to occupy a rental
unit to the exclusion of others, and actually occupy said rental unit. (Ord. 5340 § 1, 2003: Ord. .5326, 2002)
9.30.030 Evictions.
Notwithstanding California Civil Code Section 1946, a landlord may bring an action to recover
... ...............................
possession of a rental unit as defined herein only upon one (1) of the following grounds:
A. The tenant has failed to pay the rent to which the landlord is entitled.
B. The tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy and has failed to cure
such violation after having received written notice thereof from the landlord, other than a violation based on:
The obligation to surrender possession upon proper notice; or
2. The obligation to limit occupancy when the additional tenant who joins the occupants is a
dependent child who joins the existing tenancy of a tenant of record or the sole additional adult tenant. The
landlord has the right to approve or disapprove the prospective additional tenant, who is not a minor
dependent child, provided that the approval is not unreasonably withheld.
C. The tenant is permitting to exist a nuisance in, or is causing damage to, the rental unit, or the
appurtenances thereof, or to the common areas of the rental complex, or creating an unreasonable
interference with the comfort, safety or enjoyment of any other residents of the rental complex within a one
thousand (1,000) foot radius extended from the boundary line of the rental complex.
The term "nuisance" as used herein includes, but is not limited to, any gang - related crime, any
documented activity commonly associated with illegal drug dealing, including complaints of noise, steady
traffic day and night to a particular unit, barricaded units, sighting of weapons, drug loitering as defined in
California Health and Safety Code Section 11532, or other drug.related circumstances brought to the
............................................... ...............................
attention of the landlord by other tenants, persons within the community, law enforcement agencies or
prosecutorial agencies. For purposes of this subdivision, gang - related crime is any crime in which the
perpetrator is a known member of a gang, or any crime motivated by gang membership in which the victim
or intended victim of the crime is a known member of a gang.
D. The tenant is using, or permitting a rental unit, the common areas of the rental unit or rental
complex containing the rental unit, or an area within a one thousand (1,000) foot radius from the boundary
line of the rental complex, to be used for any illegal purpose.
The term "illegal purpose" as used herein, includes, but is not limited to violations of the provisions
of Divisions 10 through 10.7 of the California Health and Safety Code.
E. A person in possession of the rental unit at the end of a lease term is a subtenant not
approved by the landlord.
F. The tenant has refused the landlord reasonable access to the unit for the purposes of
making repairs or improvements, or for any reasonable purpose as permitted or required by the lease or by
law, or for the purpose of showing the rental unit to any prospective purchaser or mortgagee.
G. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession so as to:
1. Demolish the rental unit; or
2. Perform work on the building or buildings housing the rental unit or units; and:
a. Such work costs not less than the product of eight (8) times the amount of the monthly rent
times the number of rental units upon which such work is performed. For purposes of this section, the
monthly rent shall be the average of the,preceding twelve (12) month period; and
b. The work necessitates the eviction of the tenant because such work will render the rentable
unit uninhabitable for a period of not less than thirty (30) calendar days, except that if the landlord seeks to
recover possession for the purposes of converting the rental unit into a condominium, cooperative or
�i
http: / /gcode.us/ codes /glenda]e /view.php ?topic =9- 9_30 &showAIl =] &fi-ames =on 1/16/2018
Chapter 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS
Page 3 of 7
community apartment, the landlord must comply with the notice requirements of Government Code Section
.... ......................... ...............................
66427.1.
H. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit for use and
occupancy by:
1. A.resident manager, provided that no alternative vacant unit is available for occupancy by a
resident manager; except that where a building has an existing resident manager, the owner may only evict
the existing resident manager in order to replace him or her with a new manager.
2. The landlord or the landlord's spouse, grandparents, brother, sister, father -in -law, mother -in-
law, son -in -law, daughter -in -law, children, or.parents provided .the landlord is a natural person. However, a
landlord may use this ground to recover possession for use and occupancy by the landlord, landlord's
spouse, child, parent, in -laws. or grandparents only once for that person in each rental complex of the
landlord.
3. Tenants that require an occupancy agreement and intake, case management or counseling
as part of the tenancy..
I. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession in order to remove the rental unit
permanently from rental housing use pursuant to state law.
J. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply
with a government agency's order to vacate, or any other order that necessitates the vacating of the
building, housing or rental unit as a result of a violation of this code or the Glendale building and safety
code, or any other provision of law.
K. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply
with a contractual agreement relating to the qualifications of tenancy with a governmental entity, where the
tenant is no longer qualified.
L. The tenant has continued to smoke— as defined in Section 8.52.030 of this code— in any
.........................
one (1) or more of the following places, after the landlord's verbal or written warning to stop smoking:
In a rental unit that the landlord had designated as a non - smoking unit; or
2. In a common area, as defined in Section 8.52.030 . of this code, where smoking is prohibited
.............................
under Section 8.52.080 of this code. (Ord. 5628 § 25, 2008: Ord. 5383, 2004: Ord. 5340 § 2, 2003: Ord.
.............................
5326, 2002)
9.30.032
A. Offering One (1) Year Written Lease. A rental unit shall be exempt from this chapter, if a
landlord, willing to rent a rental unit to a tenant or prospective tenant, offers in good faith in writing to the
tenant or prospective tenant.a written lease which has a minimum term of one (1) year, and:
1. The tenant or prospective tenant accepts in writing the offer of a written lease which has a
minimum term of one (1) year. Signing the lease will be considered an acceptance; or
2. The tenant or prospective tenant rejects the offer for a written lease either in writing, or by
his or her failure to accept the offer of the lease within thirty (30) days of the offer, provided that a lease with
a term of one (1) year has been offered to the tenant. The landlord and tenant or prospective tenant may
then enter into a written rental agreement that provides for rental terms substantially similar to the lease
which has a minimum term of one (1) year, but for a period of less than one (1) year. Every written rental
agreement shall contain the following notice, in at least eight (8) point bold face type and circumscribed by
a box, immediately above the space for tenant's signature: "This rental unit is exempt from Chapter 9.30 of
......
the Glendale Municipal Code, Just Cause Eviction, because of the landlord's offer of a written lease which
has a term of one (1) year."
http: / /gcode.us/ codes /glendale /view.plip ?topic =9- 9_30 &sliowAll =1 &frames =on 1/16/2018
Chapter 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS
Page 4 of 7
3. In the event of an existing tenant, the terms of the written lease shall be substantially similar
to the then existing rental terms.
B. Rent. If the landlord and tenant enter into a written lease which has a minimum term of one
(1) year, such lease must set the rent for the rental unit at a rate or rates certain and these rates shall not
be otherwise modified during the term of such lease, unless agreed upon by mutual written agreement.
C. Renewal of Leases. If the landlord wishes to continue the landlord /tenant relationship, then
at least,ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the written lease, the landlord shall notify those tenants
identified in the lease or in a separate writing provided to the landlord of such expiration and offer in good
faith in writing to the tenants a written lease which has a minimum term of one (1) year. Within thirty (30)
days of receipt of such written offer, tenant shall either notify landlord in writing of his or her acceptance of
the offer of a written lease, asset forth in subsection (A)(1) of this section or reject the offer. If tenant rejects
the offer of a written lease which has a minimum term of one (1) year, the landlord and tenant may then
enter into an agreement, oral or written, that provides for a rental term of less than one (1) year, which
rental unit shall continue to be an exempt rental unit. If the landlord wishes to continue the landlord /tenant
relationship, but without offering a written lease which has a minimum term of one (1) year, then that rental
unit shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter.
D. Termination. If the landlord wishes to terminate the rental relationship, then at least ninety
(90) days prior to the expiration of the written lease, the landlord shall notify tenant in writing of his or her
intent not to renew. Such notice shall be set forth in a writing separate. from the lease.
E. Good Faith. The good faith requirement in this section shall mean honestly and without
fraud, collusion or deceit. It shall further mean that the written lease is not being'utilized as a method of
circumventing any of the provisions of this chapter. An example of good faith is when the landlord offers in
writing a lease which has a minimum term of one (1) year, that lease is substantially similar to the written
rental agreement for a period of less than one (1) year.
F. Notice. The notice herein required shall be given in the manner prescribed in Section 1162
of the Code of Civil Procedure or by sending a copy by certified or registered mail addressed to the other
............................ ............................... I ..................
party. In addition, the tenant may give such notice by sending a copy by certified or registered. mail
addressed to the agent of the landlord to whom the tenant has paid the rent for the month prior to the date .
of such notice or by delivering a copy to the agent personally.
G. Nonwaiver. Any waiver or purported waiver by a tenant of rights under this title prior to the
time when such rights may be exercised, except a rejection of a one (1) year lease offered in accordance
with this section, shall be void as contrary to public policy. (Ord. 5383, 2004: Ord. 5340 § 3, 2003)
9.30.035 Required payment of relocation fee.
A. If the termination of tenancy is based on the grounds set forth in subsections G, H, I or J of
Section 9:30.030, then the landlord shall pay a relocation fee in the amount of the product of two (2) times
the amount of the fair market rent as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development for a.rental unit of similar size of that being vacated in Los Angeles County during the year
the unit is vacated, plus one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).
B. The fee shall be paid as follows:.
1. The entire fee shall be paid to a.tenant who is the only tenant in a rental unit; or
2. If a rental unit is occupied by two (2) or more tenants, then each tenant of the unit shall be
paid a pro -rata share of the relocation fee.
C. This section shall not apply in any of the following circumstances:
1. The tenant received written notice, prior to entering into a written or oral tenancy agreement,
that an application to subdivide the property for condominium., stock cooperative or community apartment
purposes was on file with the city or had already been approved, whichever the case may be, and that the
o�-
http:// qcode. us / codes /glendale /view.pl►p ?topic =9- 9_30 &showAI] =l &frames =on 1/16/2018
Chapter 9.30 JUST CAUSE AND RETALIATORY.EVICTTONS
Page 5 of 7
existing building would be demolished or relocated in connection with the proposed new subdivision, and
the termination of tenancy is based on the grounds set forth in subsections G or I of Section 9.30.030
.............................
2. The tenant received written notice, prior to entering into a written or oral agreement to
become.a tenant, that an application to convert the building to a condominium, stock cooperative or
community apartment project was on file with the city or had already been approved, whichever the case
may be, and the termination of tenancy is based on the grounds set forth in subsection G or I of Section
9.30.030,
3. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit for use and
occupancy by a resident manager, provided that the resident manager is replacing the existing resident
manager in the same unit. For the purposes of this exception, a resident manager shall not include the
landlord, or the landlord's spouse, children or parents.
4. The landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession of the rental unit in order to comply
with a governmental agency's order to vacate the building housing the rental unit due to hazardous
conditions caused by a natural disaster or act of God.
5. The tenant receives; as part of the eviction, relocation assistance from another government
agency, and such amount is equal to or greater than the amount provided for by Section 9.30.035
.............................
D. The landlord shall perform the acts described in this subsection within fifteen (15) days of
service of a written notice of termination described in California Civil Code Section 1946; provided,.
.. ...............................
however, the landlord may in its sole discretion, elect to pay the monetary relocation benefits to be paid to a
tenant pursuant to this subsection to the landlord's attorney or to an escrow account to be disbursed to the
tenant upon certification of vacation of the rental unit. The escrow account shall provide for the payment
prior to vacation of all or a portion of the monetary relocation benefits for actual relocation expenses
incurred or to be incurred by the tenant prior to vacation, including but not limited to security deposits,
moving expense deposits and utility connection charges.
E. The requirement to pay relocation assistance is applicable to all rental units, regardless of
whether the rental unit was created or established in violation of any provision of law.
F. Nothing in this subsection relieves the landlord from the obligation to provide relocation
assistance pursuant to any other provision of local, state or federal law. If a tenant is entitled to monetary
relocation benefits pursuant to any other provision, of local, state or federal law, then such monetary
benefits shall operate as a credit against monetary benefits required to -be paid to the tenant under this
subsection. (Ord. 5383, 2004: Ord. 5340 § 4, 2003)
9.30.040 Required information on notice to quit or other written notice of termination.
Prior to or at the same time as the written notice of termination set forth in Civil Code Section 1946,
or a three (3) days' notice described in Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1161 and 1161(a), is served on
.............................................. .........................:.....
the tenant of the rental unit:
A. The landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice setting forth the reasons for the
termination with specific facts to permit a determination of the date, place and circumstances concerning
the reason. This notice shall be given in the manner prescribed by California Code of Civil Procedure
............................................... ...............................
Section 1162 and may be combined with a written notice of termination of tenancy or as a separate written
notice.
B. The landlord shall serve on the tenant a written notice setting forth tenant's right to relocation
assistance as described in subsection A of Section 9.30.035, where the termination of tenancy is based on
..................
the grounds set forth in subsections G, H, I or J of Section 9.30.030 (Ord. 5383, 2004: Ord. 5340 § 5, 2003:
.............................
Ord. 5326, 2002)
9.30.050 Affirmative defense.
http: / /gcode.us/ codes /glendale /view.plip ?topic =9- 9_30 &sliowAll =l &frames =on 1/16/201 80b
Chapter 9.30 JUST.CAUSE AND RETALIATORY EVICTIONS Page 6 of 7
In any action by a landlord to recover possession of a rental unit, the tenant may raise as an
affirmative defense any violation or noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 5326, 2002)
9.30.060 Retaliation prohibited,
A. No landlord may threaten to bring, or bring, an action to recover possession, cause the
tenant to quit a rental unit involuntarily, serve any notice to quit or notice of termination of tenancy,
decrease any services or increase the rent where the landlord's intent is to retaliate against the tenant for
the tenant's assertion or exercise of rights under this chapter or under state or federal law; for the tenant's
request or demand for, or participation in mediation or arbitration under any public or private. mediation
program including, but not limited to a program mandated by law or offered by the Glendale Apartment .
Association Landlord Tenant 12/12 Rent Disclosure Program; or for the tenant's participation in litigation.
.Such retaliation shall be a defense to an action to recover possession of the rental. unit, or it may serve as
the basis for an affirmative action by the tenant for actual and punitive damages and /or injunctive relief.
B. In. an action against the tenant, evidence of the assertion or exercise by the tenant of rights
under this chapter or under state or federal law within one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the alleged act
of retaliation shall create a rebuttable presumption that the landlord's act was retaliatory. "Presumption"
means that the court must find the existence of the facts presumed unless and until its nonexistence is
proven by a preponderance of the evidence. A tenant may assert retaliation affirmatively or as a defense to
the landlord's action without the presumption regardless of the period of time which has elapsed between
the tenant's assertion or exercise of rights under this chapter and the alleged act of retaliation. (Ord. 5340 §
6, 2003: Ord. 5326, 2002)
9.30.070 Penalty for violations.
In addition to the affirmative defense or any other rights of a tenant under law, a violation of the
provisions of Section 9.30.060 which deal with retaliatory eviction shall be punishable as an infraction as
follows:
1. A fine not exceeding two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) for the first violation;
2. A fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a second violation within one (1)
year;
3. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, a third violation of Section 9.30.060 in any
one (1) year period shall constitute a misdemeanor punishable as set forth under Section 1.20.010(A).
.............................
(Ord. 5383, 2004: Ord. 5340 § 7, 2003: Ord. 5326, 2002)
9.30.090 Applicability.
The requirements of this chapter and the availability of the remedies hereunder shall be applicable
to notices to quit or terminate tenancy, which notice(s) were served on or after August 20, 2002. (Ord.
5326, 2002)
9.30.100 Severa
If any provision of this chapter is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, this invalidity
shall not affect other provisions of this chapter which can be given affect without the invalid provisions and
therefore the provisions of this chapter are severable. The council declares that it would have enacted each
section, paragraph and sentence notwithstanding the invalidity of any other section, paragraph or sentence.
(Ord. 5326, 2002)
http: / /gcode.us/ codes /glendale /view.plip ?topic =9- 9_30 &showA11 =1 &frames =on 1/16/201`8
San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 9: Building, Housing and Sign Regulations
(9 -2016)
Article 8: Housing
Division 7: Tenants' Right to Know Regulations
( "Tenants' Right to Know Regulations" added 3 -30 -2004 by 0 -19269 N.S.)
§98.0701 Purpose of Tenants' Right to Know Regulations
The purpose of these regulations is to promote stability in the San Diego rental
housing market and limit adverse impacts on long -term residential tenants displaced
and forced to find replacement housing in the expensive and limited San Diego
housing market. The regulations protect the rights of long -term residential tenants by
limiting grounds for their eviction and requiring landlords to provide notice of such
grounds. The rights conferred by these regulations are in addition to any provided in
state or federal law.
( "Purpose of Tenants' Right to Know Regulations " added 3 -30 -2004 by 0 -19269
N.S.)
§98.0702 When Tenants' Right to Know Regulations Apply
This division applies to the rental of any rental unit (as defined in section 98.0720) in
the City except as specifically exempted in section 98.0725.
( "When Tenants' Right to Know Regulations Apply" added 3 -30 -2004 by 0 -19269
N.S.)
§98.0720 Definitions
The following definitions apply to the administration and enforcement of this
division:
"Condominium" means the same as defined in sections 783 and 1351(f) of the
California Civil Code.
"Landlord" means an owner, lessor, sublessor or any other person or entity entitled to
offer any residential unit for rent or entitled to receive rent for the use and occupancy
of any rental -unit.
"Resident manager" means a person who resides on the premises and is employed to
perform onto be responsible for the operation and /or maintenance of the rental -units
on the premises.
"Rental- unit" means a room or a group of two or more rooms designed, intended, or
used for human habitation. Rental -units include apartments, condominiums, stock
cooperatives, single- divelling units, and hotel units not exempted under section
98.0725.
Ch. An. Div.
9 1 8 7
San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 9: Building, Housing and Sign Regulations
(9 -2016)
"Single - dwelling unit" means a single detached structure containing one dwelling unit
for human habitation and accessory buildings appurtenant thereto located on a lot or
parcel and all housing services provided in connection with the use or occupancy
thereof.
"Stock cooperative" means the same as defined in California Business and
Professions Code section 11003.2.
"Tenancy" means the right or entitlement of a tenant to use or occupy a rental -unit.
( "Definitions" added 3-30-2004 by 0 -19269 N.S.)
(Amended 8-4 -2011 by 0 -20081 N.S.; effective 10 -6- 2011)
§98.0725 Exemptions
The following shall be exempt from the requirements of this division:
(a) Institutional Facilities. Housing accommodations in any hospital, convent,
monastery; extended care facility, asylum, nonprofit home for the aged,
fraternity, or sorority house, housing accommodations owned, operated, or
managed by a bona fide educational institution for occupancy by its students
or rental -units that require intake, case management or counseling and an
occupancy agreement as part of the occupation.
(b) Agency Owned or Subsidized Units. Any rental -unit owned, operated, or
subsidized by any government agency, and which is therefore subject to
substantially similar or greater state or federal eviction controls.
(c) Rooms Rented to Boarders. A rental -unit in which the landlord owns the
rental -unit, shares kitchen or bath facilities with the tenants, and also occupies
the rental =unit or a unit in the same building as his .or her principal residence.
(d) Rental -Units in Hotels, Motels, or Rooming Houses Rented to Transient
Guests which do not qualify as Single Room Occupancy Hotel "Rooms
pursuant to San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 14, Article 3, Division 5.
(e) Mobile Homes. Mobile homes subject to Mobilehome Residency Law
(California Civil Code, Chapter 2.5).
(f) Transient occupancies defined by California Civil Code section 1940(b).
( "Exemptions added 3 -30 -2004 by 0 -19269 N.S.)
Ch. Art. Div.
9 1 8 1 7
San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 9: Building, Housing and Sign Regulations
(9 -2016)
§98.0730 Termination of Tenancy
A residential tenancy of more than two years duration shall not be terminated, nor .
shall its renewal be refused, except for one or more of the following reasons:
(a) Nonpayment of Rent.
(b) Violation of Obligation of Tenancy. The tenant has violated a lawful and
material obligation or covenant of the tenancy, except that the following may
not be grounds for termination or nonrenewal. of a tenancy:
(1) The failure to surrender possession of the rental -unit upon the
expiration of a specified term, except as provided in
section 98.0730(e);
(c) Nuisance. The tenant is committing a nuisance. or permitting a nuisance in, or
is causing damage to, the rental -unit or to the appurtenances thereof or to the
common areas of the housing complex containing the rental -unit; or is
creating an unreasonable interference with the coinfort, safety, or enjoyment
of any of the other residents of the housing complex.
(d) Illegal Use. The tenant is using or permitting the rental -unit to be used for an
illegal purpose.
(e) Refusal to Renew Lease. The tenant who had a written lease or rental
agreement which terminated on or after April 26, 2004 has refused, after
written request by the landlord, to. execute a written extension or renewal
thereof within the written period prescribed by the lease or state law for a
further term of like duration with similar provisions.
(f) Refusal to Provide Access. The tenant has refused to give the landlord
reasonable access to the rental -unit for the purpose of making repairs or
improvements, or for the purpose of inspection as permitted or required by the
lease or by law, or for the purpose of showing the rental-unit to any
prospective purchaser or mortgagee.
(g) Correction of Violations. The landlord, after having obtained all necessary
permits from-the City of San Diego, seeks to recover possession of the rental -
unit for necessary repair or construction when removal of the tenant is
reasonably necessary to accomplish the repair or construction work.
(h) Withdrawal of Residential Rental Structure from the Rental Market. The
landlord intends to withdraw all rental -units in all buildings or structures on a
parcel of land from the rental market. Ch. Ari. Div.
9 8 7
aq
San Diego Municipal Code Chapter 9: Building, Housing and Sign Regulations
(9 -2016)
(i) Owner or Relative Occupancy. The landlord, or his or her spouse, parent,
grandparent, brother, sister, child, grandchild (by blood or adoption), or a
resident manager plans to occupy the rental unit as their principal residence.
(Amended 4 -26 2004 by 0 -19274 N.S.).
§98.0750 Notice to Tenant
Any landlord who attempts to terminate a tenancy - pursuant to any of the grounds set
forth in section 98.0730 shall provide the tenant a written notice to quit or terminate
which recites the grounds under which the landlord is proceeding. The landlord shall
provide the notice prior to or at the same time as the written notice of termination set
forth in Civil Code section 1946.1, or a three -day notice described in Code of Civil
Procedure sections 1161 and 1161 a, is served on the tenant.
( "Notice to Tenant" added 3-30-2004 by 0 -19269 N.S.)
§98.0760 Affirmative Defense
In any action by a landlord to recover possession of a rental -unit, the tenant may
raise as an affirmative defense any violation or noncompliance with the provisions of
this division.
( "Affirmative Defense " added 3 -30 -2004 by 0 -19269 N.S.)
Ch. Art. Div.
9 8 7
8b