New fire eviction protections sent back to committee as LA City Council again delays vote

In a heated meeting Wednesday, the Los Angeles City Council voted to again delay a decision on giving new eviction protections to tenants who lost income because of the fires.

After a contentious debate, the council voted, 10-3, to send the plan back to the Housing Committee for further consideration. Councilmember Curren Price recused himself from the vote because he is a landlord, and Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was absent.

Heated debate

The proposal has sharply divided the council. Some councilmembers accused others of using the fires as a pretext to advance an overly broad, tenant-friendly agenda.

Keep up with LAist.

If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.

Subscribe

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, took aim at one part of the proposal that sought to cancel rent increases for one year. The District 11 councilmember said she could not support any proposal “that is using a disaster in my district as a pretext for some other political agenda.”

Those who support stronger post-fire rules on evictions and rent increases said if the vote keeps getting delayed, unemployed nannies and gardeners who lost their jobs in the Pacific Palisades could soon find themselves in eviction court.

“It is not a political agenda — I’m talking about people,” said Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, who co-wrote the proposal and represents District 1.

The council first decided to delay the vote two weeks ago. In the same meeting, the council passed other emergency items intended to help those harmed by the fires.

“When it's for one community, we're willing to do everything we can,” Hernandez said. “But when it's for another community, we keep putting up barriers to help them, and that's ridiculous.”

What the rules would do

As currently written, the proposal would allow tenants to attest to their landlord, under penalty of perjury, that they were economically or medically harmed by the January 2025 fires.

If landlords tried to evict those tenants for failing to pay rent on time, the tenants could raise the proposed protections as a defense in eviction court. The proposed protection, if approved by the council, would remain in place for one year, after which the tenants would need to pay any past-due rent.

The rules are similar in many ways to the renter protections the city had in place during the COVID-19 pandemic. At that time, the city also banned rent hikes in rent-controlled properties for nearly four years.

The proposal on the fires sought a new one-year rent freeze.

Landlords and tenants show up at City Hall

Landlords have long argued that tenants abused the city’s COVID-19 rules to avoid paying rent for years, at a time when property owners saw their insurance and maintenance costs rise.

Dozens of landlords spoke during Wednesday’s lengthy public comment period, urging the city to avoid any return to COVID-era protections.

“The reason I'm on the verge of losing my properties is because of COVID, and the increase we didn't have for a numerous amount of years,” said Dexter McLendon, who described himself as a landlord with a small number of inner city properties.

Tenant advocates also came out to push for new protections. They said L.A.’s housing market was already unaffordable for many renters before the fires. Now, they say, landlords’ efforts to raise rents (in some cases above legal limits) are putting even more pressure on tenants.

“People all across the city are barely hanging on, losing their income from businesses and houses that burned down, and facing landlords waiting to evict them to bring in higher paying renters,” said Christina Boyar, an attorney with the nonprofit Public Counsel.

Timeline for next steps is unclear

Many councilmembers said they felt uncomfortable voting on the proposal until after it could be further debated and revised by the council’s Housing Committee.

Councilmember John Lee, of District 12, said any new tenant aid needs to be more narrowly tailored to those directly harmed by the fires. As written, he argued, the proposal could depress investment in the city’s housing stock.

“When we as a city tell developers and property owners that, at any moment, the Los Angeles City Council can commandeer your investment, who is going to want to build in this city? Who is going to want to do business here?” Lee said.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez, who supports strengthening post-fire eviction protections, said he’s already hearing from constituents who lost work after the fires.

“They have to pay the rent in three days,” Soto-Martinez, of District 13, said. “As the city of Los Angeles, we have to say something to support those people.”

It’s not yet clear when the proposal will come up for a vote in committee. For now, many L.A. tenants living in rent-controlled housing are set to receive increases of 4% to 6% on Feb. 1.