Santa Rosa tenant protections stalled by City Council’s landlord recusals

A plan to protect Santa Rosa renters from being evicted by landlords seeking to capitalize on the October wildfires hit an unexpected obstacle this week when it was revealed for the first time that three members of the City Council are themselves landlords.

The development raised conflict-of-interest questions as well as broader concerns about the council’s ability to pass renter protections when so many of them earn income from rentals.

The council was set to consider on Tuesday immediate restrictions on evictions without just cause as a way to block landlords from ousting tenants specifically to attract new ones who, because of fire insurance, can pay higher rates.

For the “urgency” ordinance to go into effect immediately, as planned, it needed five yes votes to pass. But Mayor Chris Coursey removed the item from the agenda after three of the seven council members announced they would not be voting on the issue because they earn income from rental properties they own.

“We’ve got some problems with people recusing themselves,” Coursey said in postponing the proposal until January.

Councilman John Sawyer’s decision not to vote on the item was no surprise. He and his husband own rental properties in Santa Rosa and elsewhere. He received a formal opinion from the Fair Political Practices Commission last year advising him not to vote on issues that would affect him directly, such as last year’s rent control law.

But somewhat surprising were the announcements by Councilwoman Julie Combs and Councilman Jack Tibbetts that they would not participate in the vote either, citing advice of the city attorney.

Combs said she has rented a room in her home for years to a young married couple who are friends of her children. And Tibbetts said he had three tenants living in his house and planned to recuse himself on the issue.

Neither had publicly disclosed the financial arrangements before, though it is not clear they needed to.

Combs’ housing arrangement didn’t stop her from voting on a similar issue last year.

She voted in favor of the rent control and just-cause-for-eviction ordinance the council passed in 2016 and was overturned earlier this year at the ballot box.

Combs said that case was distinct because single-family residences, like hers, are exempt from local rent control laws under a state law known as the Costa-?Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Neither she nor her boarders would have been covered by the city law had it gone into effect, she said.

A previous city attorney told her she did not need to recuse herself from voting on the issue, though she did not get it in writing, she said.

It’s less clear if she would have been covered by the just-cause-eviction rules she voted in favor of at the time. The regulations, if applicable, would have made it harder for her to evict her boarders, meaning she would have been acting against her own interests.

She declined to say how much she earns from the arrangement, but said it is “far less” than the ?$800 to $900 market rate. The couple do not have a signed lease. Nevertheless, the money is a form of steady, if modest, income for her and her husband, she said.

“In this case I do have direct financial benefit, and I think I would take the advice of the city attorney in this case,” Combs said.

Tibbetts purchased a home in east Santa Rosa earlier this year, where he lives with his fiancée. Three friends of theirs also rent rooms in the home, including two college buddies who had planned to move to Sonoma County before the fires but found that challenging after them, Tibbetts said.

Tibbetts said he would be seeking a ruling from the Fair Political Practices Commission on his situation and hoped to be allowed to vote on it in the future.

He said he’s frustrated that landlords are being advised to recuse themselves from such votes but renters are not. He noted he also was required to recuse himself from voting on an important homelessness program but was later found not to have needed to.

“Sometimes we can be overly cautious about these recusals,” he said, adding that he appreciates the legal guidance he has received.

Regardless of the FPPC advice or that or the city attorney, council members can vote as they see fit.

The issue arose because unlike the rent control and just-cause-for-eviction ordinance from 2016, the new proposed tenant protections are related to the state and local anti-price gouging ordinances passed after the fires, which are worded more broadly, City Attorney Sue Gallagher said.

Her advice was made “out of an abundance of caution,” and she said she hoped the FPPC could give the city some additional legal guidance prior to the Jan. 9 meeting,when the issue is expected to be reconsidered.

By then, Gallagher said she also hoped to provide the council with some additional documentation about eviction patterns, she said.

Her original report cited a number of instances of landlords canceling ?affordable-housing contracts managed by the city since the fire. But other city officials said the 15 instances of federally subsidized Section 8 housing contracts being terminated did not represent a higher rate than before the fires.

However, Ronit Rubinoff, executive director of Legal Aid of Sonoma County, said there is little question that a spike in evictions has occurred since the fires. Her office has seen a 20 percent increase in evictions during an end-of-year period when they normally drop, she said.

“I think people are being opportunistic,” Rubinoff said. “I think people are trying to take advantage of the incredible spike in rental pricing.”

High rents are precisely why the young couple is renting a room in her home instead of getting their own place, Combs said.

It would be a shame if the council was prevented from helping renters in need because some council members are sharing their homes with people priced out of the market, she said.

“If we can’t protect tenants in an emergency within an urgency ordinance, that seems wrong,” Combs said.

You can reach Staff Writer Kevin McCallum at 521-5207 or kevin.mccallum@pressdemocrat.com. ?On Twitter @srcitybeat.