Landlords to collect right of appeal from city
CITY HALL — In a deviation from the usual script, the City Council is expected tonight to author a scene that favors landlords over tenants.
Known for being a staunch protector of renters’ rights, council members could move to make life a little easier for the landlords by capping the amount of money they have to pay tenants for relocation during the repair or renovation of their units.
At present, City Hall doesn’t limit how much landlords must pay when they temporarily move a tenant out of an apartment. Landlords are also forced to pay for relocation, even if the tenant is responsible for the damages that made repairs necessary, such as a fire.
Those provisions, or lack thereof, led one landlord to file suit against City Hall for failing to comply with a state provision that offers landlords the right to appeal the awarding of relocation benefits. In that case, the Santa Monica Fire Department deemed that the fire — which rendered two units uninhabitable — was caused by a tenant smoking while laying in bed. The owner was ordered to provide relocation benefits until the units were repaired.
The owner subsequently sued City Hall, claiming the relocation law was an unconstitutional taking of property, because it requires that benefits be paid in “unlimited amounts” and denied landlords the right to an appeal, which is granted under state law.
In the interest of clarifying and complying, the City Attorney’s Office recommended changes that include setting a “per diem” rate or a flat fee per day for housing, meals, laundry and pet accommodations.
It has not yet been determined what the per diem rates will be. The council will consider the rates once the changes are approved, said Deputy City Attorney Adam Radinsky with the consumer protection, fair housing and public rights unit.
Under the proposed changes, landlords will also be allowed to appeal the awarding of benefits and will no longer be forced to pay if a tenant is found to be entirely or primarily responsible for causing the damages that prompted the relocation in the first place.
While state law limits relocation payments to two months, plus the cost of deposits for a new unit, the changes being considered by the council do not include a time limit. This was done out of fear that landlords would delay making repairs to force rent-controlled tenants to give up and move out.
The city of Berkeley, for example, has a three-month cap. West Hollywood has a six-month cap.
“I think this will provide clarity, because a lot of questions we get are how much the owner actually has to pay and what is considered a reasonable hotel,” said Tracy Condon, a spokesperson for the Rent Control Board, which handles disputes between tenants and landlords over rent increases and decreases, overcharges and amenities.
If relocation is under 30 days, a landlord currently must set a tenant up in a hotel. In the past, there have been disputes over what type of hotel a landlord must provide.
“There is always room for dispute on what the amount should be, what type of hotel should it be,” Condon said. “With this (change), we will be able to provide better answers to the owner and the tenant. It does-n’t have to be a fancy hotel, but it has to be reasonable.”
The changes proposed state: “If a tenant will be displaced for a period of less than 30 days, the tenant shall be entitled to relocate to a motel or hotel... which is safe, sanitary, located in Santa Monica and contains standard amenities such as a telephone.”
If the relocation is for longer than 30 days, the temporary housing must be rental housing and be comparable in size to the tenant’s existing unit, include the same number of bedrooms, be in close proximity to services such as hospitals and schools, and allow for any pets the tenant owns.
While the landlord pays all costs associated with the temporary housing, the tenant is still required to pay the landlord rent for the existing unit under repair.
Carl Lambert, president of the Action Apartment Association, which represents property owners in Santa Monica, did not seem pleased when asked about the changes.
“It is baffling to me why the council would put more of a burden on the backs of landlords that are suffering under rent control,” Lambert said. “This is going to push more landlords out of business when they get to the critical point where their buildings have to be remodeled... I understand having to pay for a hotel and little bit of a per diem, but everybody eats out in this day and age and life goes on.
“Why should we be forced to completely pay for and support a tenant’s lifestyle just because we are trying to improve their residence.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on October 24, 2006. Read the original PDF.