Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tenant Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lemon Grove residents plead for help as Olive Street tenants receive renovation notices and rent hikes
Summary
Multiple long-term residents of a Lemon Grove apartment complex told the council they received 60–90 day notices and were told rents would jump; the council asked the city attorney to draft tenant-protection options and staff to follow up with affected tenants.
At the Jan. 20 Lemon Grove City Council meeting, a string of residents from an Olive Street apartment complex pleaded with council members to halt what they described as abrupt renovation notices and steep rent increases that threaten long-term, elderly and disabled tenants.
Residents described a pattern they said began after new owners took over the complex at 3280 Olive Street. "First they basically lied to our faces," said Danny Morrissey, a U.S. Navy veteran who said he and others in his complex were handed 60-day notices after being told earlier they did not need to move. Morrissey said about "67 units" on the block were being affected and that some tenants include elderly people and residents with dementia.
Why it matters: Tenants said the notices — and proposed re-rental at higher rates — would force many longtime, fixed-income residents from the community. Speakers repeatedly said online reapplication requirements and large deposits make it effectively impossible for seniors and disabled residents to remain.
City attorney Kristen Steinke told the council Lemon Grove currently has no tenant-protection ordinance but outlined options: a regular ordinance (two readings, effective about 30 days after adoption) or an urgency ordinance that could take effect immediately if the council makes specific health, safety or emergency findings and secures a four-fifths vote. "You can bring back an item that would address tenant protections," Steinke said, adding that more facts would be needed to determine whether urgency findings could be made.
Council action: A council member moved, and another seconded, to have the city attorney review the situation and start drafting a proposed tenant-protection ordinance. The motion was supported on the floor for follow-up and staff outreach to affected tenants.
Detail and context: Speakers gave specific examples: one caller said his rent of $1,487 could be replaced by a new rent of $2,900; another said one-bedroom units were being advertised at dramatically higher rates. Several residents said they had been used as model units for realtor showings and then later received notices. Commenters also described mental-health impacts, limited mobility and digital barriers to applying for housing online.
What the city will do next: Council directed staff to reach out to the residents who spoke and to pursue drafting a tenant-protection ordinance for future consideration; the city attorney said the choice between a regular or urgency ordinance will depend on documented facts and whether council can make the required emergency findings.
Closing: The council did not adopt an ordinance at the meeting; instead, it asked the city attorney to prepare proposals and staff to contact the affected residents for further assistance.
