Rent Control Board moves to study landlord disclosures when amenities may be removed

The Santa Monica Rent Control Board voted to place a proposal on its March agenda to form an ad hoc committee that would consider recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance requiring landlords to disclose to prospective tenants, at lease signing, if advertised amenities will be eliminated or significantly changed during the lease term because of planned landlord-initiated construction.

Commissioner Embryse introduced the discussion item, citing a recent case in which a tenant said they signed a lease and later lost parking and storage because permitting and construction occurred. Embryse said the proposal would require landlords to disclose at the time of lease signing any amenities the landlord knows will be removed or substantially changed due to planned construction. Embryse said, in part, that the disclosure would be ‘‘prior to them signing the lease’’ and would apply when the landlord is aware of planned construction at the time of signature.

Commissioners discussed scope and potential safeguards. Commissioner Dudek suggested tying disclosure to a permit being on file or approved and asked whether a rent reduction could be considered when an amenity is removed. Commissioner Leslie and others raised concerns about how to define market-rate adjustments and how to prevent potential gaming by landlords who might disclose planned construction to remove amenities and later charge for them.

Several commissioners expressed interest in serving on an ad hoc committee and in working with council members; Commissioner Embryse said Council Member Raskin indicated he would be willing to work with the board. The board then made a motion to place formation of an ad hoc committee on next month’s agenda; Commissioner Embryse moved, Commissioner Leslie seconded, and a voice vote was taken. Chair Gonska called the vote: aye; no commissioners voiced opposition. The motion carried.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the change is aimed at improving transparency so prospective tenants can decide whether to sign a lease when an amenity is likely to be removed. Commissioners also noted the ‘‘devil’s in the details’’ and that any recommendation would require drafting precise criteria (for example, whether a building permit must be filed) and guardrails to prevent unintended consequences.