CSA San Diego County, Written by Monica Lopez

CSA San Diego County investigates hundreds of fair housing complaints annually. Not all complaints have intentional actions at their source. A certain number are the result of agents or landlords lacking proper training, in-depth knowledge of fair housing laws, or the use of rental documents that are out of date.

Fair Housing Training
Fair housing training is a critical element in reducing complaints. Housing providers should ensure that they and their employees understand their responsibilities under federal and state fair housing laws, and act on those responsibilities in their daily interactions with both applicants and residents.

An example of the need to stay current on fair housing laws training: 
Amy the apartment manager received training in fair housing laws in 2008 when she was first hired. Recently, she denied an applicant because their housing community, to her knowledge, does not accept Section 8 vouchers. Had Amy updated her training annually, she would have been made aware that the applicants receiving assistance from programs such as Section 8 are now protected under Source of Income laws.

Fair Housing Knowledge
In-depth knowledge of fair housing laws is essential as well. Limited fair housing education can result in wrongful actions and costly lawsuits.

An example of the need for in-depth knowledge of fair housing laws:
Sara the leasing agent was recently hired and was required to watch a 1-hour fair housing training video during orientation. The video covered very basic information regarding protected groups and prohibited actions, but do specifics on disability-related topics. Six months later, Sara encountered a complaint. She had informed an applicant with a disability that they could not rent a unit in her building because his assistance animal was on the "breed restricted" list. Sara was unaware of "reasonable accommodations" under California law.

Discriminatory Policies, Practices, and Procedures
CSA has experience in investigating errors that occur in rental applications, rental agreements, and house rules. A well-educated and currently trained individual should always review any of these documents before implementing them to ensure the contents comply with fair housing laws.

An example of the need for awareness of discriminatory practices:
A house rule that prohibits children from leaving their apartment unless accompanied by a parent. The Fair Housing Act prohibits rules that target any protected groups. Families with children may encounter issues with housing providers who maintain overly restrictive or targeted rules. Having a fair housing law-educated and trained individual review your rules prior to posting is always the best practice.

The solution to housing discrimination starts with you.  If you or your staff are in need of training, contact CSA.

327 Van Houten Avenue, El Cajon, CA 92020
www.c4sa.org
Phone: 619-444-5700
TTY: 800-735-2929

CSA San Diego County is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization whose primary mission is the promotion of social justice and public welfare through programs, services, and advocacy against all forms of discrimination, including advocacy for the eradication of housing discrimination to assure equal housing opportunity for all individuals.

_______________________________________

Members of the Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS^® (PSAR) made a powerful statement for property rights on behalf of housing providers while attending a recent Chula Vista City Council meeting where the subject of a new rent control ordinance was on the docket.

The City Council was considering an aggressive and overreaching ordinance that imposes additional regulations on housing providers. The controversial proposal, if passed, would negatively impact new housing creation by tightening restrictions on remodeling, owner move-ins and rental unit withdrawals, as well as expanding noticing and relocation assistance requirements.

Following over five hours of public comments, including testimony from many PSAR members, the City Council tabled a vote on the proposed ordinance, titled the “Residential Landlord and Tenant Provisions.” The Council stated that more data on the topic and potential language revisions are needed.

The actions taken by PSAR members were considered invaluable in the successful effort to prevent the Council from implementing an ordinance that would exacerbate the housing crisis. A revised version of the ordinance is expected to be considered by the City Council at a July 12 session.

Among the PSAR members who spoke at the May 17 city council meeting: Pat Russiano, Mike Campbell, Mark Scott, Nikki Coppa, Rich D'Ascoli, Yvonne Cromer, Robert Cromer, Mitch Thompson, George Ching, Eric Sutton, Peter Carlseen, Sam Calvano, Lupe Soto, Earl Jentz, Myllissa McCann and Josh Morales.

Richard D’Ascoli, PSAR CEO, stated in his testimony, “Most housing providers and owners are good people and most renters are good people. This extreme ordinance will punish every homeowner who may want to rent out a home and every renter who can’t find a place to rent.”

D’Ascoli cited a city staff report that included information from the Legal Aid Society of San Diego. According to the data, “no-fault” eviction disputes involve fewer than .27 percent of the 33,000 rental homes in Chula Vista annually, pointing to a much smaller issue.

The number of evictions totaled 13 in March, three in February, and seven in January. “Shouldn’t we help those 13 households rather than impact 33,000 rental units?” D’Ascoli asked. “Most housing providers are good actors, it’s the few we need to address. Let’s focus on them and not punish the entire city.”

D’Ascoli identified the long-term ramifications of the proposed ordinance: “Rent control and similar market restrictions will discourage the creation, maintenance, and upgrade of rental housing stock. This ordinance will discourage additional rehab and negatively impact the low-income renters the provisions were intended to serve. This ordinance also will reduce the value of properties in Chula Vista, compared to similar properties in other cities. Prudent property owners will choose to buy or build in areas with less cost and regulatory risk.

“Chula Vista will stagnate as the incentive to replacing aging, smaller complexes with upgraded, more dense buildings will no longer exist. Owners of single-family rental homes will either sell to national real estate investment trusts or they will sell to new owner-occupants. Available rental stock will decrease. Prices for renters will increase because supply will continue to be highly restricted. Also worrisome is the provision that anyone who violates any part of this law could be charged with a crime and sent to jail for up to six months.”

Other speakers from PSAR made the following points:

-- Burdensome regulations will result in less available housing, not more. This ordinance adds to the regulatory burden.
-- Provisions in the ordinance meant to prevent harassment of tenants would deter property owners from dealing with nuisance tenants.
-- Added renovation regulations would deter owners from upgrading rental properties, thus hurting tenants and surrounding neighborhoods.
-- The ordinance would create new, vague “anti-harassment” rules regulating landlord-tenant interaction, expanded notification requirements of up to 365 days, and higher relocation payments.
-- Landlords would be required to offer evicted renters, even if those renters caused property damage, the first right of refusal to move back in after a renovation.
-- The state of California recently enacted protections for tenants with AB 1482. That law provides sufficient regulation of landlord-tenant relationships.

Coalition partners with PSAR on the proposed Chula Vista ordinance included the Southern California Rental Housing Association (SCRHA) and the San Diego Association of REALTORS® (SDAR).

More Articles and News Coverage

Renters, Landlords at Odds Over Proposed No-Fault Eviction Proposal - Mitch Thompson shows new appliances as part of remodeling efforts. KPBS-TV, 05/17/2022.

Chula Vista City Council Postpones Eviction Moratorium Protection Vote - No decision after more than five hours of public comments and postponement until July 12. KPBS-TV, 05/18/2022.

Chula Vista City Council Considers Controversial Tenant Protection Ordinance - PSAR board member Jason Lopez explains the proposal is a solution looking for a problem. KUSI-TV, 05/18/2022.

Chula Vista Considers Ordinance Strengthening Protections for Tenants - PSAR 2022 President Max Zaker and PSAR member Mitch Thompson tell NBC 7 how the proposal would actually hurt tenants. KNSD-TV NBC 7 San Diego, 05/16/2022.

Chula Vista Council Hears from Over 50 Speakers - The meeting lasted for hours as landlords say the proposed ordinance would force them to sell their properties. KGTV-TV 10News, 05/17/2022.

Decision Postponed on Controversial Renters' Protections - Quote from PSAR CEO Rich D'Ascoli: "...An ordinance that is overreaching..." KFMB-TV, CBS8, 05/18/2022.

There is a critical shortage of housing inventory. An excessive amount of red tape helped cause that shortage. Now, the City of Chula Vista is considering additional regulations on Housing Providers.

The proposed "Residential Landlord and Tenant Provisions" will impose the following:

• Regulations that make substantial remodels, owner move-ins, and withdrawal from the rental market more difficult by adding stricter noticing requirements and relocation assistance requirements.
• The creation of laws that allows for civil action and damages of $1,000-5,000 per violation per day.
• The criminalization of any violation of the ordinance and the creation of fines in the thousands of dollars.

Mayor Mary Salas requested the creation of this ordinance in response to calls from tenant and rent control advocates. Unfortunately, the unintended consequences of this ordinance would end up harming tenants as well.

The unintended consequences of this ordinance will include the following:

• The added difficulties of being a housing provider in Chula Vista will discourage the creation of much needed additional housing. This will hurt all of us, including those who would have a much harder time finding a place to rent. 
• The added difficulties of undertaking substantial renovations would deter owners from upgrading unsightly buildings. This hurts the tenants who would live there and the livability of the surrounding communities. 
• Provisions in the ordinance meant to prevent harassment of tenants would actually deter property owners from dealing with tenants who cause nuisances. This would hurt the tenants and all neighbors who live nearby and would have to deal with the nuisances.

It is well established that when you add regulation to something, you get less of it. We need more housing, not less. The State of California has recently enacted protections for tenants by enacting AB 1482. If there are problems for tenants, the City could focus on finding better ways to enforce existing laws, rather than adding more regulations that will negatively impact our already scarce housing supply.

Please send an eComment to the City stating your opposition to this misguided ordinance by clicking on the button below, and then clicking on the "Leave Comment" button:

_______________________________________________________________________________

Not sure which Councilmember represents your neighborhood?  See below.

Questions remain about the City of San Diego’s pending ‘No-Fault Eviction' Moratorium.

On April 4th, after almost six hours of public testimony which included comments from PSAR volunteers and members, the city council passed the ‘No-Fault Eviction' Moratorium ordinance. The ordinance must come back for a second reading a month after the first reading and will go into effect 30 days after final approval.

Thanks to the efforts of PSAR and our colleagues, the original ordinance was amended to include an end date or sunset on September 30, 2022 (or 60 days after the end of the local emergency) whichever is sooner.  Realtors are wondering about how this ordinance will impact property owners who want to sell.

• No termination of tenancy is allowed for a substantial remodel unless mandated by the government or court order.
• Owners who wish to move into their homes or move in family members will have to serve a 90-day notice to terminate the tenancy. An immediate family member is limited to a parent, child, grandparent, and grandchild.

Property owners who wish to terminate a tenancy in order to withdraw units from the rental market, this includes selling a home, must provide a 6-month notice.

The ordinance is likely to receive final approval next month and it will cause unintended consequences. Additionally, some of the language is vague and confusing. Once the ordinance is finalized, PSAR will schedule legal counsel to brief our members on its impact. PSAR will continue to review the ordinance and is prepared to challenge it again at the second reading.

Before working with a client to terminate a tenancy, it is important to speak with your broker and legal counsel. This ordinance will put many owners in difficult positions.

A copy of the proposed ordinance may be found here.

This web page item #200 has links to the PowerPoint and backup information for a deeper dive.

The Board of Supervisors will meet on Wednesday, February 9th at 9 am to discuss the implementation of a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Policy which could end hopes that San Diego will meet the housing needs of its residents.  

Please urge the Board of Supervisors to keep housing a top priority in San Diego County.  

You can submit written comments by clicking here: submit comments.

This proposal is item 7 on the Agenda, if you would be willing to testify on this, you can sign up here:  Sign up to speak

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recently, PSAR sent a three-page letter to the San Diego County Board of Supervisors expressing our opposition to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) proposal.  See a copy of the letter by following this link.

VMT is a proposal that would slap new fees on housing development in car-centric communities. The fees would be calculated based on the additional “vehicle miles traveled.” Housing developments in rural or suburban areas would face fees that would disincentivize their construction.  Any homes that do get built would need to factor in those additional fees, pushing the dream of homeownership further beyond the reach of most aspiring buyers.  

Under the proposed VMT, to get approval for a project, a housing developer would have to show that their project would generate fewer vehicle miles traveled than the area’s average. 

PSAR’s letter to the Board of Supervisors states: “Homeownership is the bedrock of building strong communities and intergenerational wealth. REALTORS® know firsthand that buyers are moving to Riverside, Imperial Valley, and Mexico to own a property and build a future. They subsequently commute for hours on San Diego freeways, defeating the intent of the VMT policies.

“There are numerous economic and regulatory barriers that discourage developers from building both attached and detached “for-purchase” housing for all levels of income. If the County is forced to adopt a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) planning tool that is being considered with a regional planning focus, the cost of new housing in the unincorporated portions of our region will be increased significantly, adding to the current housing shortfall.

“This policy will severely restrict future generations from realizing the dream of homeownership and a better quality of life for themselves and generations to come.”

The letter also states that PSAR is supporting six recommendations from the Building Industry Association (BIA) of San Diego County. BIA’s recommendations include an Infill Area Option, VMT Mitigation Program Options, and a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to analyze VMT impacts.

PSAR is opposing VMT implementation because of the potential impacts on historically disadvantaged communities who would find it harder to realize the dream of homeownership.

PSAR’s letter states: “Homeownership is an essential steppingstone for families to build wealth. By adding requirements that will make homeownership opportunities more expensive for working families to purchase, we will be removing a crucial steppingstone for those who have not already had an opportunity to purchase a home. We would essentially be closing the door behind those who have already been fortunate enough to purchase a home.

“Society has been making a lot of strides towards providing historically disadvantaged communities with opportunities that had previously been denied to them. We should not be halting that progress by limiting access to homeownership opportunities. The book `The Color of Law’ by Richard Rothstein provides a very detailed analysis of how unequal access to homeownership due to government policies directly resulted in economic harm that continues to hold back communities of color to this day. Considering the fact that communities of color in San Diego are still suffering from the multigenerational impacts of redlining and segregation, we should not be implementing policies that cement these impacts by stopping the creation of new opportunities for homeownership or confining new housing opportunities for lower-income residents to certain areas.”

At their Jan. 26 meeting, the Board of Supervisors received a report from county planners that laid out ways to implement VMT. The board directed the planners to return on Feb. 9 with additional details on VMT options.

Please urge the Board of Supervisors to keep housing a top priority in San Diego County.  

You can submit written comments by clicking here: submit comments.

This proposal is item 7 on the Agenda, if you would be willing to testify on this, you can sign up here:  Sign up to speak

PSAR is proud to announce that 15 PSAR members have been approved by the PSAR board of directors for recognition by the California Association of REALTORS^® (C.A.R.) as honorary members for life.

The 15 members include:

Congratulations to each esteemed member for your long-term commitment to professionalism and excellence in the real estate industry.

This latest 2021 group of new C.A.R. life members will receive a waiver of C.A.R. dues beginning in 2022. They will continue to receive a dues waiver for as long as they remain eligible for REALTOR^® membership or until retirement from the field.

Requirements to be honored as a C.A.R. life member include remaining as a C.A.R. member in good standing for a minimum of 25 years and attaining the age of 75.

Acceptance as honorary members for life also requires approval of the C.A.R. Membership Committee and the C.A.R. Board of Directors at one of its three annual membership meetings. Applications for the honorary member-for-life designation must be received in advance of the meetings in order for the dues waiver to be effective the following year. Applications will not be processed without the signature of the member’s local association executive.

Applications are available on the C.A.R.website and using THIS FORM

For additional information, send an email to hmfl@car.org.

_______________________________________

PSAR was recently honored for writing excellence by the San Diego Press Club,

PSAR received an award in the “In-House or Employee Publications” category for recent “Voice of Real Estate” stories, an ongoing series covering the latest real estate industry trends. 

In addition, PSAR was honored in the “General Writing for Internal Publications” category for a series of profile stories about PSAR members.

It was the seventh consecutive year that PSAR has been recognized for writing excellence by the San Diego Press Club.  

The PSAR member profile stories have generated high readership levels and fostered closer bonds among PSAR colleagues. A frequent response to the stories among members who have worked together for years is, “I didn’t know that about you.”

It was the fourth consecutive year that PSAR has received a Press Club writing award for its “Voice of Real Estate” series.

The monthly Voice articles feature updates on local and statewide housing market conditions based on statistics from the California Association of REALTORS®, as well as other recent news about real estate and economic trends, cited from news reports.

The Voice articles also satisfy a core standard from the National Association of Realtors requiring real estate trade associations to provide realtor members with regularly scheduled information on the housing market, and real estate trends and issues.

The San Diego Press Club’s recent 48th annual Excellence in Journalism Awards drew over 1,100 entries, making it one of the largest journalism competitions in the nation. Judges were press club members in Alaska, California (San Francisco, Orange County), Florida, Louisiana(New Orleans), New York (Rochester), Ohio (Cleveland), and Wisconsin (Milwaukee)

The San Diego Press club presented over 500 awards in 130 categories and 10 divisions. Winners included reporters, writers, artists, photographers, videographers, corporate communicators, and public relations professionals. Top winners included The San Diego Union-Tribune with 42 awards in online, daily newspapers, and photography categories, Ranch and Coast Magazine with 22 awards in magazine and photography categories, and the San Diego Business Journal with 19 awards in non-daily newspaper categories.

The San Diego Press Club is one of the largest clubs of its kind in the nation with 400 members, all in the news communications field. The group offers professional growth activities and promotes integrity and high ethical standards in journalism.

_______________________________________

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded $47.4 million to fair housing non-profit organizations around the country.  At least two of the organizations are based in San Diego. In September these testing organizations received  $653,000 for the Private Enforcement Initiative (PEI).  According to HUD, these organizations will conduct intake and testing.  They will investigate and litigate fair housing complaints under the Fair Housing Act. According to the Department of Justice website:

"Testing refers to the use of individuals who – without any bona fide intent to rent or purchase housing, purchase a mortgage or vehicle loan, or patronize a place of public accommodation – pose as prospective renters, borrowers, or patrons for the purpose of gathering information. This information may indicate whether a provider is complying with federal civil rights laws. The primary focus of the Section's Fair Housing Testing Program has been to identify unlawful housing discrimination based on race, national origin, disability, or familial status in violation of the Fair Housing Act. The Section also has responsibilities to enforce Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the nation's public accommodations law; the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which prohibits discrimination in credit; and the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which provides protections for military members as they enter active duty. The Fair Housing Testing Program also conducts testing under these statutes, as well as under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which is enforced by the Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division."

Agents must also understand that California has additional protected classes including Ancestory, CREED, Gender Identity, Medical Condition, Source of Income/Occupation, and "Other Arbitrary Discrimination."  The definition of a "Protected Class" is all-inclusive in California.  Agents need to be aware of their unconscious biases and be careful to treat everyone equally.

In March of 2021 HUD Published the 2021 civil penalty amounts for fair housing violations. Civil penalties may reach a maximum of $54,157 and respondents who had violated the Act two or more times in the previous 7 years could be fined a maximum of $108,315.

PSAR, NAR, and C.A.R. have been diligent and have provided fair housing resources for Realtors for many years. During the past two years following the Newsday Investigation called "Long Island Divided" the Associations doubled down the efforts.  PSAR has hosted or promoted at least eight opportunities this year for agents to better understand fair housing.  NAR also prepared a "gamified" training to help agents understand the law.  The game is called Fairhaven.  More information may be found here.

Testers may be reaching anonymously to agents and property managers in the field.  The best practice is to understand and obey the law.  PSAR agents are the most professional in California and the Nation. PSAR's staff and volunteer leaders are available to help our members with resources and training. This law is important and there is no room for error.

Watch this video to see how real estate agents treated undercover clients on Long Island.

CRMLS launched a new IDX transparency initiative on September 1st, 2021.

What is IDX?  “Internet Data Exchange” is a means by which each MLS Participant (AKA Broker In the MLS) subscribing to the (IDX) program permits the limited electronic display of Participant’s listings appearing in Internet Data Exchange Database on each Participant’s (Other Broker's) IDX Internet websites and on applications for mobile devices that said participating Broker Participants and R.E. Subscribers control.

The newly updated rule Rule 12.16.5 listing credit:

All Listing Brokers grant permission for any Advertising Broker to display any listings submitted to the service by the Listing Broker only if the listing display or advertisement is clear so that a reasonable real estate consumer understands:

a) Who is the Listing Agent & Broker?
b) Who is the Advertising Broker?
c) How to contact that Listing Agent or Broker.

Note: These changes only affect how agent and broker IDX websites display your MLS data in public sites, not any other form of marketing. They are unrelated to communications between you and your clients.

What are the full implications of this rule? How do agents and brokers make sure your IDX feeds are compliant? Where did this rule come from, and why, and how does it benefit you?  To answer these questions and more,

CRMLS’s Vice President and General Counsel Edward Zorn - VP & General Counsel at California Regional MLS (CRMLS), will host a Webinar Wednesday, September 15th at 2:00 PM centered on the IDX Transparency Initiative.

Edward Zorn,  will also review frequently asked questions,  display examples of this new change, and take questions live.

Art Carter, CEO of CRMLS

Provides quick insight into the rule change on this 2:35 minute video.

The Pacific Southwest Association of REALTORS and many of our property managers and owners are financially supporting the Southern California Rental Housing Association's (SCRHA) efforts to seek an injunction preventing the county from implementing and enforcing its rental moratorium. The County has been ineffective at distributing the hundreds of millions of dollars received from the federal government for rent relief programs.  SCRHA is distributing the following press release: 

Court Denies SCRHA’s Legal Challenge to County’s Eviction Moratorium Ordinance; SCRHA Immediately Appeals Decision

Ordinance Threatens Safety, Quality of Life of Tenants; Livelihoods of Thousands of County Property Owners Who Provide Rental Housing.

SAN DIEGO (July 27, 2021) – Over a month after a decision was expected, a federal judge has finally issued a decision denying the Southern California Rental Housing Association’s (SCRHA) request for a preliminary injunction to prevent San Diego County from implementing or enforcing the San Diego County Emergency Eviction Moratorium Ordinance.

U.S. District Court Judge M. James Lorenz denied SCRHA's motion, citing the temporary nature and public interest of the ordinance. In his July 26, 2021 decision, Lorenz stated that it is beyond dispute that owners are impacted by the eviction moratorium, but he said in the ruling: “However, the harm they are suffering in terms of stress and emotional hardship will be short-lived, as the Ordinance is set to expire in the middle of August 2021.”
Within an hour of receiving the ruling on July 27, 2021, SCRHA filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“We are greatly disappointed with this ruling, which leaves housing providers with no recourse to deal with renters who cause problems for their neighbors or who otherwise violate their agreements,” said SCRHA Executive Director Alan Pentico. “Bottom line: This is unfair to everyone. That’s why we will continue to challenge this extreme and unconstitutional law.”

“As housing providers, we believe in doing our part and serving our community. We were designated as essential workers during the COVID-19 pandemic – and we have continued to show up to maintain and operate our rental communities,” Pentico added. “Sadly, housing providers’ own rights have been trampled. It’s a shame that this court chose to minimize the real harm that the eviction moratorium is causing to housing providers and rental communities.”

The County’s Emergency Eviction Moratorium Ordinance indefinitely bans nearly all evictions within the County. The ordinance, which affects evictions within both the unincorporated areas of the County and within all local Cities, went into effect on June 3, 2021 – dramatically limiting the rights of property owners who rent out their homes, duplexes, condos, accessory dwelling units, or apartments to tenants.

SCRHA filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court seeking an injunction against the ordinance, saying it threatens the livelihoods of thousands of county property owners – many of them independent, small “mom and pop” landlords – and strips them of their federal constitutional rights to use and control their own properties. Most troublingly, the ordinance fails to protect public safety because it doesn’t allow evictions of violent, lawbreaking or nuisance-creating tenants unless the landlord can prove an “imminent health and safety threat,” and it doesn’t allow financially stressed owners to move into their own homes. For more information, visit http://socalrha.org/evictionban.

The Eviction Moratorium Ordinance would end 60 days after all work-at-home and stay-at-home orders are lifted. The stay-at-home and work-at-home orders expired on June 15, 2021, making the ordinance’s tentative expiration date August 14, 2021, the ruling stated. However, the County’s motion had indicated the ordinance was set to expire on August 10, 2021.  For more information about the lawsuit look here.

PSAR encourages all property managers and housing providers to consider joining the SCRHA.  We partner with SCRHA to help protect private property rights.

C.A.R, COVID LEGAL DOCUMENTS are available for addtional help

The C.A.R. COVID-19 forms are all available in zipForm® Plus in the C.A.R. forms library, and can be easily located by searching the library under the “COVID-19” category. Additionally, you can find the following Quick Guides and Legal Q&A’s on our website here:

• Quick Guide – The COVID-19 Tenant Relief Act—The Statewide Rent Moratorium Law (extended through September 30, 2021) [revised 7/9/21]

• Quick Guide – The Centers for Disease Control Federal Eviction Moratorium Order [revised 7/9/21]
• Quick Guide – Expanded State Rental Assistance Program for Landlords
• Quick Guide – Unpaid Rent Eviction Guide During COVID Protected and Transition Periods [revised 7/9/21]
• Legal Q&A – Eviction Moratorium Extension and State Rental Assistance Program – Senate Bill 91 [revised 7/2/21]
• Legal Q&A – State Rent Moratorium Extension and the COVID Rental Housing Recovery Act (AB 832) [revised 7/9/21]