Pixel Tracker

Friday, December 14 , 2018, 5:06 am | Fair 50º

 
 
 
 

County Supervisors Approve Added Protections for Renters

The board takes up changes to Ordinance 4444 that cover displaced tenants and mass evictions

Eviction is a dreaded word in any renter’s vocabulary. Put it on a scale where 30 or more families lose their homes, and eviction becomes that much more frightening. Combating mass eviction and helping renters transition to new housing was the focus of a decision Tuesday from the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, which approved a revised ordinance adding more protections for renters.

Changes were approved for county Ordinance 4444, which has been on the books since 2002 but is seldom enforced. The ordinance states that landlords needing to improve properties with code violations are required to financially reimburse displaced tenants. Changes to the ordinance were approved 4-0, with Supervisor Joe Centeno absent.

Ordinance 4444 was created out of a desire to motivate owners to keep their properties in habitable condition, and provides relocation assistance only if the tenant is displaced as a result of a health and safety violation. That assistance has been expanded, but not every displaced renter meets the criteria. Now, the ordinance applies only to buildings of four or more units, and least 10 percent of those tenants must be relocating because a landlord is either demolishing, remodeling or changing the land use of the property.

As an incentive to comply, landlords would be eligible for “fast-tracked” permitting by the county’s Department of Planning and Development, if the property owner can demonstrate that he or she has provided tenants with a timely security deposit return and advance notice of 90 days, as well as the relocation benefits.

The ordinance provides for a sum equal to three months of fair-market rent, which is determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Utility service deposits also are covered, and none of those amounts changed under the new ordinance.  The changes also apply to new leases entered into after April 2011.

Most of the public speakers who spoke Tuesday supported the amendments, and even said that they didn’t go far enough.

Joyce Howerton, of the Santa Barbara County Action Network and a member of the Rental Housing Roundtable, supported the amendments, but she urged the supervisors to keep relocated tenants in the same community. She recommended that tenants be relocated within a mile of their previous home.

“This is important to minimize disruption to the family,” she said, adding that evicted children should stay in the same school district and people who lack car transportation need to get to work.

Charles Eckert, president of the Santa Barbara Rental Property Association, also supported the ordinance, saying it effectively deals with mass evictions. He did express concern, however, about language in the ordinance that allows groups to bring forward lawsuits.

Belen Seara, of PUEBLO and co-chairwoman of the Rental Housing Roundtable, conjured up the chaos that the Modoc evictions brought to families in 2008.

“Ninety children were left wondering, ‘Why us?’” she said.

Many displaced families are in danger of becoming homeless, and several of the Modoc tenants are still dealing with the repercussions of the 2008 evictions.

Though the county didn’t have translators available for Spanish-speaking commenters, Maria Patricia Flores was able to speak via another public commenter. Flores explained that she had lived in Isla Vista for 24 years and was evicted from her apartment in 2006. Because of her eviction, Flores had to live at a student co-op for two months, where she lived with six other people in one bedroom. She said her children had to live with friends during that time, and missed school, causing their grades to drop.

“I couldn’t give them an answer to their questions or explain everything that was happening,” she said. 

Felipe Flores of the ACLU of Santa Barbara County spoke about the Cedarwood evictions in 2006.

“I saw people whose entire lives were disrupted,” he said, adding that he was with the families in court. “It was truly heartbreaking to see that there was no legal recourse.”

Mickey Flacks, also on the Rental Housing Roundtable, argued that the ordinance should cover all tenants, even single units.

“They need help when they are thrown into today’s type rental market,” she said.

As a landlord of a duplex, Flacks said such a requirement wouldn’t be burdensome to her.

County Supervisor Doreen Farr suggested several changes to the ordinance after public comment ended. She discussed the distance that tenants could be relocated from their original home, saying that five miles was appropriate and that the ordinance would apply countywide, not just in dense Isla Vista, and a one-mile radius in certain areas isn’t feasible. Tenants can waive that distance if nothing is available in the area.

The county also struck language that would levy fees on landlords who don’t comply, and that language was added back at Farr’s request. Though he had to leave before a vote was taken, Centeno also spoke up, saying that when the ordinance changes come back before the board, he would like to see more crackdowns on renters who intentionally destroy their units. Though a tenant who intentionally destroys property wouldn’t qualify for the payments, Centeno asked that the statute go further, perhaps with a fine.

Noozhawk staff writer Lara Cooper can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk or @NoozhawkNews.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.