Salinas council pauses decision on referendum over rent ordinances, urges stakeholder talks; sets Sept. 23 follow-up

Salinas City Council on Sept. 9 delayed a final decision on a referendum that could nullify four recently adopted rent-related ordinances, voting to continue consideration until a special council meeting Sept. 23 to give stakeholder groups additional time to negotiate a path forward.

The referendum, filed by Protect Salinas Renters and verified by the county, seeks to put a so-called "repeal ordinance" to voter decision. The council was presented with two options at the meeting: repeal the repeal ordinance (which would keep the rent-protection measures in effect) or submit the repeal ordinance to the voters. After hours of public comment — with hundreds of supporters on both sides of the question — Councilmember Tony Barrera offered a substitute motion to delay a final council decision for two weeks so that the two stakeholder groups that had begun meeting could continue discussions. The substitute passed: Barajas — yes; Barrera — yes; D'Arrigo — yes; Dela Rosa — yes; Salazar — no; Sandoval — yes; Mayor Donohue — yes.

What the council was deciding

The signatures submitted by referendum organizers were certified by the Monterey County Registrar of Voters; the city clerk reported that the petition contained more than the minimum number required to qualify. If the council does not repeal the repeal ordinance, the city must put the repeal ordinance to voters at either the next regular municipal election (not less than 88 days after the council’s order) or at a special election called for that purpose. The city clerk gave the council estimated election costs: roughly $494,000–$706,000 for a November 2026 general election, and roughly $1.13M–$1.7M for a standalone special election, based on the city’s 70,635 registered voters.

Citizen voices and the negotiating effort

The council heard more than three hours of public comment on the issue. Tenants, youth groups and advocacy organizations urged the council to "repeal the repeal" and keep rent stabilization and tenant-protection ordinances in effect; residential landlords, property managers and the local chamber of commerce urged the council either to repeal the repeal tonight or to refer the question to voters so the entire electorate can decide.

Several organizations said they had started a facilitated dialogue. The Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce convened an initial meeting on Friday that included representatives picked by landlord and renter groups; the groups met again after the council’s Sept. 9 meeting. At the meeting, renter representatives said they were not yet prepared to negotiate ordinance language but would take the landlord proposals to their constituencies for review. That was a key reason the council agreed to hold the decision for two weeks.

A sampling of comments: Joel Hernandez, who identified himself as working with Centro/CCA, urged the council to accept public input and said organizers had gathered more than 10,400 petition signatures; Jorge Hernandez, executive director of the Center for Community Advocacy, told the council, "Repeal the repeal — repeal the repeal. This movement that was started by Protect Salinas Renters is more than 10,400 people that signed..." portrayed by organizers as a grassroots effort. At the same time, the Salinas Valley Chamber and other property owners told council members they want a more transparent negotiation about how the ordinances work in practice and urged modifications to provisions they said would harm small landlords and future housing supply.

Council direction

Councilmembers repeatedly expressed a preference for community-based solutions and for more time for the two sides to explore common ground. Mayor Donohue and several council members encouraged stakeholders to keep meeting and to provide an update at the Sept. 23 meeting; staff said the council should be prepared on that date either to repeal the repeal or to place the repeal ordinance on the ballot for voters to decide. The city attorney clarified that if the repeal ordinance is submitted to the voters and approved, it would determine whether the repeal becomes effective; either path does not foreclose future council amendments to the remaining ordinances so long as they are not effectively a new repeal within 12 months.

What to expect next

Councilmembers asked that the two convening groups continue their conversations and return with a short update on Sept. 23. Staff also said they will continue to analyze election timing and cost implications and will provide any legal clarifications needed. If council opts to send the repeal ordinance to the ballot, the city faces the choice of a special election or waiting for the next regular municipal election; staff emphasized the cost differences and the need to meet statutory timing rules for any special election.

Ending note

The meeting reflected polarized views across the city: tenant advocates said the ordinances represent protections that bring stability to households; owners and managers warned the rules will crush investment and raise costs. With the council’s two-week pause, both sides will have another opportunity to try to narrow their differences before the council makes a final procedural choice on Sept. 23.