California legislators are proposing state-level protections against tenants who have not paid rent for two years, just 2 years after the outbreak of the pandemic. Both landlords as well as tenant advocates are angered by this move.
The state Assembly passed Monday’s bill 62-1. It would have extended a policy that stopped tenants from being evicted if they had already applied for emergency rental assistance. This policy will expire on Thursday. Assembly Bill (A.B. Assembly Bill (A.B.) 2179 would prolong the pause until June’s end.
“It would be cruel, wasteful and unfair to subject these Californians to eviction or the loss of rental income now, when they have done everything asked of them, and distribution of their emergency rental assistance is imminent,” said the bill’s co-author, Assemblymember Tim Grayson (D–Concord) in a statement.
In December 2020, COVID Relief bills were passed in March 2021. California received $5 billion of emergency rental aid funds in order to pay back the rent that tenants owe to their landlords. The latest U.S. Treasury Department data shows that the state has spent $3.6 Billion of this money as of January 31st.
Eviction moratoriums were often extended because rent relief has not yet trickled out. The state’s extension of eviction protections is naturally resentful to landlord groups.
Christine Kevane LaMarca from the California Rental Housing Association stated, “Enough Is Enough.” CalMatters.
The bill doesn’t directly harm landlords. Localities were previously prohibited by the state from applying eviction protections passed after 2022, which was between August 2020 and April 2022. A.B. 2179. Cities or counties could not start to enforce their eviction bans until July 2022.
This would put off more severe eviction moratoriums for San Francisco and Los Angeles County that were due to take effect from April 1. They would both prevent any evictions due to nonpayment.
A.B. has been criticized by tenant activists as well as lawmakers in those areas where stricter protections were required than allowed by the state. 2179 has been rejected for this reason. Some people are dissatisfied that the bill continues a strange situation in which local bans on evictions that were enacted before August 2020 may still be in force.
“The legislation also preempts local eviction moratoria in certain places, including San Francisco and most of Los Angeles County, while leaving local eviction moratoria in place in other cities, such as the City of Los Angeles and Oakland,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener (D–San Francisco) and Assemblymember Phil Ting (D–San Francisco) in a Friday statement. We shouldn’t play favorites and allow some cities to help their renters, while preventing other cities.
Both stated that they would oppose A.B. 2179 in its current form. Ting was one Please enter noThe Assembly will vote for the bill. Wiener was the only. Please enter noYesterday’s meeting of Senate Judiciary Committee voted against the bill.
However, landlords who live in cities that have eviction ordinances prior to August 2020 don’t get any relief from the bill.
Neil Seidel owns six Los Angeles single-family rentals. He tells There are reasons He has had one tenant, who has racked up over $100,000 in unpaid rental rent on one property since March 2020. He complains about her allowing unauthorized guests to stay at the house, which has caused property damage and even the need for police intervention.
Los Angeles’ eviction moratorium has been in place since March 2020. It will not expire unless a state of emergency is declared. Nonpayment or nuisance of rent is not allowed in the city.
Seidel states that the tenant’s claims of COVID-related hardship are bogus because she is an executive at a healthcare company. According to federal financial disclosures, his tenant filed reports on behalf of the company’s chief financial officer even as recently as March.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which she was employed by, also prohibited her from trading stocks in April 2020. This is because it misled investors that the company had COVID testing and personal protective equipment for sale. SEC eventually brought charges against the company and its executives in July 2021.
It is possible that Seidel could have held a hearing to determine if the tenant was able to be eligible for city eviction protections. L.A. does allow tenants to selfcertify that they are actually covered by this moratorium.
“It sucks. It is being taken away from us and our basic sacred rights of property ownership. Seidel says that it will drag on and on.”
The Supreme Court overturned New York’s self certification provisions for New York’s Eviction Moratorium in August 2021. They argued it deprived landlords of due procedure by prohibiting them from disputing tenants’ hardship claims.
Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles is currently suing the county and city for violating their eviction moratorium. As mentioned above, the latter is still in place. A.B. 2179 would delay it again. 2179 passes.
These were temporary measures. Two years later we find ourselves in Los Angeles with a Super Bowl match. Hundreds of thousands of spectators were there, and they are not wearing masks.” says Daniel Yukelson (executive director of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles). It’s not necessary.
A.B. A.B. 2179 was approved by the California Senate Judiciary yesterday. The Senate Judiciary passed 2179 yesterday. It now heads for the Senate floor where it will need two-thirds vote support.