California landlords and tenants entered 2015 in a legislative standoff: each side often had more success stopping the other’s bills than advancing a broad agenda. Even so, renter relief, housing discrimination, eviction law, domestic-violence protections, and local rent regulation remained significant subjects.
At the time, proposals under discussion included restoring the renters’ rebate, prohibiting discrimination against households using Section 8 assistance, changing the Ellis Act, and extending protections for tenants experiencing domestic violence. A statewide rent-control proposal was not expected during that session.
Democrats had lost their legislative supermajority, but the original analysis argued that the change alone was unlikely to transform tenant policy. Modest security-deposit and Ellis Act measures had already stalled, while real-estate interests continued to exert substantial influence across party lines.
The session did not coincide with regularly scheduled state legislative elections. Tenant advocates therefore saw an opening to renew pressure for specific changes, even though the overall legislative climate remained difficult.
A statewide political strategy
In 2015, a statewide tenant action organization launched with the stated aims of evaluating legislators, supporting tenant-aligned candidates, and advancing legislation. The premise was that policy advocacy without electoral accountability had repeatedly failed to overcome entrenched political opposition.
Local tenant organizations had long participated in candidate endorsement and organizing. Advocates hoped that applying related strategies at the state level could alter the incentives surrounding housing legislation.
An opinion essay in the Sacramento Bee framed the larger conflict as one between corporate and human interests. Within the article’s argument, statewide tenant organizing was intended to bring that framing directly into legislative politics.
The renters’ rebate
A coalition entered the 2015 budget debate seeking restoration of programs cut during the recession. For renters, one prominent demand was renewed funding for the renters’ rebate.
The rebate had been eliminated from the 2008 budget. At that time, it offered as much as $347.50 to qualifying older and disabled renters earning below a stated threshold. The benefit had helped recipients cover necessities, and advocates argued that its elimination harmed households with limited incomes.
The governor’s proposed 2015 budget did not restore the program. The Legislature retained the ability to provide funding through the budget process, while a prior effort to establish a broader rebate program had stalled in committee. Advocates expected stronger attention to the issue because state revenue was then running above earlier projections.
Discrimination against voucher holders
In 2015, California law did not expressly provide the statewide protection advocates sought for renters using Section 8 housing assistance. That legal landscape allowed some property owners to reject applicants—or seek to remove existing tenants—because rent was partly paid through the program.
A Sacramento senior’s eviction helped intensify the campaign. The property’s reported effort to eliminate Section 8 participation prompted a statewide response from tenant advocates.
Oregon had recently enacted a prohibition addressing this form of discrimination. California advocates argued that people already facing a shortage of stable, affordable homes should not encounter an additional barrier because they used rental assistance.
Ellis Act reform
The Ellis Act was used most visibly in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica, with other rent-regulated cities also exposed to its effects. The law permits a property owner to remove all units from the rental market, but tenant advocates argued that speculative buyers were using it to displace residents for profit.
A 2014 proposal would have authorized San Francisco to restrict certain speculative uses locally. It narrowly passed the state Senate but stopped in an Assembly committee.
Reported Ellis Act eviction rates in San Francisco subsequently declined. At the opening of the 2015 session, advocates were still assessing whether another reform proposal could advance and what form it should take.
Protections for survivors
Legislation enacted in 2013 gave certain tenants experiencing domestic violence or human trafficking a path out of unsafe housing without the usual financial penalties associated with ending a lease. Key provisions were then scheduled to expire in January 2016.
Housing and anti-violence advocates expected legislation during the 2015 session to preserve those protections. The issue illustrated how tenant law can directly affect a person’s ability to leave a dangerous situation.
State and local rent control
The original analysis did not expect a statewide rent-control bill in 2015, despite steep rents and rapidly increasing housing costs. It instead anticipated stronger local campaigns, including efforts in communities around the Bay Area.
Property-owner and real-estate groups opposed local regulation, while tenant organizers argued that high rents and increasingly consolidated ownership made stronger protections necessary. The result was a policy debate likely to proceed city by city rather than through a single statewide proposal.