Salinas council sends repeal of rent ordinances to November 2026 ballot after months of dispute

The Salinas City Council voted 4–3 on Sept. 23 to submit an ordinance repealing recent rent-related protections to the Nov. 3, 2026 general municipal election, after weeks of public protests and a high-turnout petition drive.

The decision follows a months‑long public debate after opponents secured and certified a referendum petition that qualified to suspend the repeal ordinance. Council member [name listed in roll call] moved earlier to repeal the repeal ordinance outright; Council member Carmen Sandoval offered a substitute motion — which passed — to send the question to city voters on the November 2026 ballot.

Why it matters: The ordinances at issue — a rental registration program, rent stabilization caps, just-cause eviction protections and an anti‑harassment rule — were adopted earlier in a multi‑year process intended to limit displacement of renters. Opponents and supporters have sharply disagreed about the ordinances’ economic and legal impacts; the council’s vote hands the final decision to a full electorate rather than leaving the rules to council action.

Council action and immediate effect

City Clerk records show the referendum petition met the county’s signature threshold, which prompted the council’s September discussion of whether to repeal the ordinance or put the repeal before voters. The council’s substitute motion to place the repeal on the Nov. 3, 2026 general election passed by the following tally: Yes — Council members de Arrigo, Dela Rosa, Salazar and Sandoval (4). No — Council members Barajas, Barrera and Mayor Donahue (3).

Public reaction and principal arguments

Supporters of the ordinances — including tenant organizers and dozens of residents who spoke at the hearing — urged the council to retain the protections while the city collects more data. Andrea Diaz of Centrobinacional, speaking for community groups, said the ordinances were “rooted in data collection and community involvement” and urged the council to honor the referendum process.

Opponents — including local landlords and real‑estate professionals who also addressed the council — warned the rules would reduce investment, prompt property sales and decrease maintenance. Multiple speakers urged a public vote; others said the matter should be resolved by local negotiation.

Council members’ rationale

Council members who voted to refer the question cited the need for the broadest public legitimacy before making a permanent policy change on a contentious topic that affects thousands of households and multiple property owners. Those who voted no said they preferred the council to act directly and expressed concern about long‑term costs and market impacts.

What happens next

Because the council chose the November 2026 general election, the city will work with the county elections office on ballot placement and ballot language. The city clerk and city attorney will prepare the procedural steps required to place the question on the ballot, and staff indicated they will continue to collect implementation data in the meantime.

Ending note

The council’s vote does not itself change the record of the referred ordinance; it sets the question for a future public decision. The decision opens a year of public campaigning and leaves the detailed implementation and data collection work in the hands of city staff and stakeholder groups until voters decide.