Goleta council approves first reading of amended tenant protections ordinance, shortens withdrawal window to five years

Goleta — The Goleta City Council on Sept. 2 introduced and conducted first reading of an amended tenant protections ordinance (Chapter 8.19 of the Goleta Municipal Code), voting unanimously to send the measure on for a second reading with one substantive change: the council reduced the draft’s proposed rebuttable presumption period for units withdrawn from the rental market from 10 years to 5 years.

The ordinance package, presented by Senior Housing Analyst Lucy Graham, would convert an existing urgency ordinance adopted in December 2023 into a permanent regulation and adds or clarifies several tenant protections, including an enhanced early-alert notice, stricter definitions and remedies for tenant harassment, a documented petition procedure for landlords seeking rent increases following a “substantial remodel,” and a required city-provided relocation information handout to accompany no-fault termination notices.

Why it matters: The changes aim to reduce displacement and unexpected homelessness by giving renters more notice, clearer remedies for harassment, and more predictable relocation assistance while preserving landlord rights under state law. The measure drew sustained public comment from tenants, tenant advocates and landlords; council members debated the balance between discouraging bad-faith withdrawals and not unduly restricting legitimate changes of use.

Key provisions and figures

- Relocation assistance: Staff recommended and the ordinance text proposes that relocation payments for no-fault terminations be equal to two months of the tenant’s current rent or $8,000, whichever is greater. As Lucy Graham told the council, “Staff is recommending that relocation payments be equal to 2 months of the tenant's current rent or $8,000 whichever is greater.”

- Early-alert notice: The draft creates an “early alert tenant notice” option that gives tenants an additional 60 days (120 days total when combined with the existing no-fault notice) and allows landlords who provide the early notice to pay half the relocation assistance at notice and half at move-out.

- Withdrawal from the rental market: The ordinance clarifies the city’s expectation that permanent withdrawal should be for a multi-year period; the council replaced a proposed 10-year rebuttable presumption (that a re‑rental within that window suggests the withdrawal was not permanent) with a 5-year period in tonight’s motion.

- Substantial-remodel petition: The draft creates a formal petition process by which a landlord can apply to the Planning & Environmental Review department for permission to raise rent above ordinance caps after a qualifying, substantial remodel; the director’s decision would be appealable to the Planning Commission.

- Harassment remedies: The draft enumerates tenant‑harassment behaviors (reducing services, delaying repairs, threats, retaliation) and lists potential remedies including actual damages, a $1,000 minimum per violation, and civil penalties up to $10,000, noting these would be civil remedies available through the courts rather than city‑administered fines.

Council and public reaction

Council members generally praised staff and the ordinance committee for the research and outreach. Several council members urged clearer public education about how the ordinance works; one councilmember said the city should publish plain-language handouts and short videos to reduce confusion.

Public comment illustrated the spectrum of views. Tenants and tenant advocates urged stronger protections, short-term per diem assistance when relocations last fewer than 30 days, and a transparent petition standard. Several landlords and realtors warned that too-large relocation payments or overly long withdrawal presumptions could drive owners to sell or remove units from the long-term rental market.

Vote and next steps

The council voted unanimously to introduce the ordinance and conduct first reading, as amended to replace the 10-year withdrawal presumption with 5 years and to correct a clerical typo in the staff report. The ordinance returns for a second reading and final adoption; staff indicated any additional refinements (for example, formalizing petition forms and outreach materials) will be brought back before final adoption.

Quotes

Lucy Graham, Goleta senior housing analyst: “Staff is recommending that relocation payments be equal to 2 months of the tenant’s current rent or $8,000 whichever is greater.”

Ed Belcher, tenant and member of Santa Barbara Tenants Union: “Do not include the proposed substantial remodel rent petition in the code…there’s no reason to have a higher rate than 10% on return of what [the tenant] was paying before.”

Anna Arce, policy advocate, CAUSE: “Provide a clear petition process…require that any rent increase requests be supported by verifiable, transparent financial documentation.”

Ending

The council’s decision to proceed with a first reading — and to shorten the withdrawal presumption to five years — moves Goleta closer to a permanent tenant protections framework. Staff will return with any required ordinance refinements and the formal petition materials before the second reading and final adoption.