Salinas council sends repeal of rent ordinances to November 2026 ballot after months of protests and public comment

The Salinas City Council voted 4–3 on Sept. 23 to place the council’s earlier repeal of four tenant-protection ordinances (repeal ordinance, Ordinance No. 2687) before voters at the Nov. 3, 2026, general municipal election.

The council’s substitute motion — made by Councilmember Salena Sandoval and seconded by Councilmember Salazar — passed with Councilmembers D’Arrigo, De La Rosa, Salazar and Sandoval voting yes and Councilmembers Barajas, Barrera and Mayor Dennis Donahue voting no.

Supporters of keeping the ordinances in place said the repeal had been carried out without adequate community input and would remove protections for renters who, they said, face displacement and harassment. “The decision to gut these protections was made without any data, public input, or respect for the democratic process,” said Andrea Diaz, who read an English translation during public comment for Centro Ignacional and speakers aligned with the Protect Salinas Renters petition.

Opponents and several landlords and property owners said the local rules would harm small-scale owners and discourage investment, and they urged a public vote or other changes to avoid long-term fiscal and housing-market consequences. “Listen to what the public’s telling you,” landlord advocate Jeff Davie told the council during public comment.

Why it matters: More than 10,000 Salinas residents signed a petition to qualify a referendum on the council’s June repeal. Under California election law, the petition qualified for review by the Monterey County Registrar of Voters; the county verified the signatures and the city accepted that verification. Councilmembers who supported placing the repeal on the 2026 general ballot framed the vote as the most inclusive way to resolve a divisive local policy fight.

What the council did: The council did not reverse its June repeal that removed the rental registration, rent stabilization, just-cause eviction and anti-harassment provisions. Instead, the council voted to submit that repeal to the voters in the November 2026 general election, a step that requires only a majority vote of the council. Council members who opposed the substitute motion argued for different approaches, including immediate repeal-and-reinstate negotiations and additional community outreach.

Public input and context: Council meetings on the topic drew dozens of speakers — renters, youth leaders, tenant advocates and small landlords — and repeated calls for broader community engagement. Several community groups including youth leaders from CCA and organizers for Protect Salinas Renters urged the council to restore the ordinances and allow data collection and program implementation before any further changes. Landlord groups and property owners emphasized the potential fiscal impacts and difficulties for small owners.

Election logistics and cost: City staff outlined election options and estimated costs during the meeting. The city clerk reported that a general municipal election typically costs the city roughly $7–$10 per registered voter when consolidated with other jurisdictions; Salinas had about 70,635 registered voters at the time of the clerk’s report. Special elections are more expensive. City staff said the city typically budgets $500,000 for election costs and would not expect an additional per-ballot cost if the measure is placed on the regular Nov. 2026 municipal ballot.

What’s next: The council’s action directs staff to place the referendum question on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot and to undertake the administrative steps necessary to do so. Interested residents, renter-advocacy groups and property-owner groups will likely mount campaigns for and against the measure in the lead-up to the election. The council and staff also discussed but did not adopt interim changes to the city’s rental programs during the meeting.

Council vote: Substitute motion (place repeal ordinance on Nov. 3, 2026 general election) — Mover: Councilmember Salena Sandoval; Second: Councilmember Salazar. Vote: Yes — Councilmembers D’Arrigo, De La Rosa, Salazar, Sandoval (4). No — Councilmembers Barajas, Barrera, Mayor Dennis Donahue (3). Motion passes.