THIS FRIDAY, February 14, 2025 the LA City Council will be voting on Item 13 a motion to create yet another eviction moratorium for non-payment of rent and no-fault evictions for renters impacted by the wildfires for ONE FULL YEAR.
WHY IT MATTERS: The Eviction Moratorium/Eviction Defense is completely unnecessary given other new ordinances already in place from the City, County, Governor’s Executive Orders and Mayor’s Executive Orders AND rental assistance that has become available.
Furthermore, renters impacted by the wildfires are already receiving new rental assistance from FEMA, Economic Workforce Development Department (EWDD), Los Angeles County’s Worker Recovery Fund & Business Interruption Fund, L.A. Rises, California Community Foundation and many other non-profit and for-profit entities as well as unemployment benefits from the state.
Item 13 proposes to institute a 1-year eviction moratorium for nonpayment of rent and other terminations of tenancy due to economic hardship related to the fires. It also suspends all rent increases for additional occupants regardless of fire impact. While intended to provide relief, this policy is unnecessarily broad and risks significant unintended consequences.
The council has already passed emergency protections for people and pets displaced by the fires. It also suspended additional increases for these individuals. Item 13 goes far beyond these measures, imposing an overly extended ban that relies on self-attestation of hardship, prohibiting rent collection with little to no verification. Self-attestation was abused during the pandemic, leaving many housing providers unable to recover losses.
Over 650 million dollars have been raised for fire relief in addition to a 2.5 billion dollar state package. The city has access to ULA funds for emergency rental assistance. With substantial resources available, housing providers should not be forced to shoulder such a burden without compensation.
Don’t repeat the policy mistakes of COVID-19. The consequences remain: ongoing litigation, a strained housing market, and continued harm to the city’s housing stock. Unlike the pandemic, there is no citywide unemployment crisis or stay-at-home order to justify extreme measures.
