Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rent Stabilization Ordinance Repeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Salinas council votes to repeal local rent-registration and tenant-protection ordinances after heated public comment
Summary
After hours of public testimony and legal questions, the Salinas City Council voted to repeal four local rental ordinances that had imposed local rent-stabilization, tenant-protection and rental-registration rules. Residents, tenant advocates and landlords clashed at a meeting marked by crowded public comment and conflicting legal reporting.
The Salinas City Council voted on Tuesday to repeal four locally adopted rental ordinances, including the city’s rent-stabilization and rental-registration measures, after several hours of public comment and debate.
The vote followed a legal clarification from City Attorney Chris Callahan, who told the council the court case that some media cited did not rule the city’s ordinances unconstitutional or illegal. Callahan said the court matter cited in coverage was an unlawful-detainer case and "the constitutionality of the city's ordinance was never at issue." Nonetheless, the council majority moved to rescind the local programs.
Councilmembers who supported repealing the ordinances argued the measures had discouraged investment in rental housing and increased costs for some property owners. Opponents — ranging from tenant advocates, community groups and many Salinas residents — urged the council to keep local protections in place, saying state law alone would not provide sufficient protection for renters in the city.
Hundreds of residents and representatives of advocacy groups, landlords and trade associations spoke at the meeting. Esther Malcolm of Monterey County Renters United told the council, “The majority of the commenters that are here tonight reflect the majority of the residents in Salinas, and they are not the ones that have any money to contribute to campaigns.” Attorneys from California Rural Legal Assistance and other tenant-advocacy groups warned of increased evictions and displacement without local enforcement tools.
Industry groups and some property owners urged repeal. Adam Pinteritz of the Monterey County Association of Realtors told the council the number of rental units put up for sale spiked after the ordinances were first proposed; he argued the repeal would prevent further conversions of rental units to sales. Anil Babar, representing the California Apartment Association, said the council’s earlier decision to move to repeal was “following the statewide trend” and urged the city to focus on housing production rather than local rent limits.
Councilmember Andrew Sandoval proposed a substitute motion to delay repeal for five months and require data collection, community engagement and recommendations; that motion failed on a 2–5 vote. The council then voted on a motion introduced by Mayor Dennis Donahue to repeal the four ordinances; the motion carried 4–3. (Roll-call vote recorded in the actions[] block below.)
City staff and speakers repeatedly raised the question of how to use fees already collected under the rental-registration program and how to staff any rental-assistance or mitigation program. Community Development Director Lisa Brenton presented options for a rental-assistance program and administrative costs for a small pilot, and City Manager Mendez and staff said they would return with program frameworks and funding options if the council wanted the city to seed a rental-assistance program.
The city attorney earlier advised the council that ordinances typically take effect 30 days after adoption and that, under the city’s rules, an ordinance can be adopted the same night it is introduced only with unanimous council consent. Callahan also told the council there are follow-up procedural matters the city would need to address if repeal moves forward, including fee resolutions and contracts connected to the prior programs.
What’s next: Council members asked staff to return with more detailed options for a rental-assistance program, including potential funding sources, administration partners and eligibility criteria. Several councilmembers and community speakers urged the city to pursue funding partnerships with philanthropy and county, and to avoid cutting general municipal services to seed any long-term rental-assistance program.
The vote capped one of the most attended, longest and most contentious sessions the council has held this year. Public commenters lined the rotunda and dozens spoke during the public comment and ordinance items, and advocates promised to continue engagement with the city whether they agreed or opposed the repeal.
