Committee votes to adopt codified right-to-counsel ordinance, approves Version A

A Los Angeles City committee on June 11, 2025 voted to adopt Version A of a codified right-to-counsel ordinance, approving the measure on consent with two ayes and one member absent.

Supporters of a codified right to counsel urged the committee to adopt Version A, which they said uses the same definition of “tenant” found in the city's rent-stabilization and just-cause ordinances. Tommy, a member of the Los Angeles Community Action Network, testified in support and said Version A “has the correct definition of tenant,” arguing consistent language would avoid delays and preserve access to representation in eviction cases.

Barbara Schultz of the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles told the committee that Section 271 of the City Charter directs the city attorney to provide legal advice when requested, but that council had provided specific instructions on the ordinance and did not ask for changes to the tenant definition. She warned that the city attorney’s alternative draft (Version B) could create a loophole that might leave some tenants ineligible for counsel by allowing landlords to claim a tenant was a trespasser.

Other tenant-advocacy speakers — including representatives from the Right to Counsel Coalition, LA CAN and community organizations — also urged adoption of Version A, saying right-to-counsel programs in other cities have reduced evictions and saved public money.

Councilmember Blumenfield said the choice of Version A was acceptable and stressed the committee was not consciously changing prior practice on whether people occupying a property without authorization would be covered. The committee’s clerk read the motion to approve Version A (dated 05/30/2025) and to not present and order-file Version B (dated 05/30/2025) and a revised ordinance (dated 05/12/2025). The roll call recorded Councilmember Grama and Councilmember Blumenfield voting aye; Councilmember Gerardo was absent.

The committee approved the ordinance on consent and congratulated two appointees who were present earlier in the meeting for other items. The city attorney had provided both drafts to the committee; advocates and members pressed the committee to finalize the ordinance and move it forward to the full council for adoption.

Additional procedural notes: the committee agreed to adopt Version A and to order-file the alternative drafts rather than pulling the item for extended debate. The vote recorded on the committee’s roll was two ayes and one absence.