Extension for state’s eviction freeze nears final deadline
A push to extend California’s eviction freeze for struggling tenants is down to the wire, with just days to go before the current moratorium is set to expire on June 30.
Even with the impending deadline, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders have struggled to come up with a plan that can satisfy both tenant advocates warning of a looming eviction wave and property owners who want to tighten eligibility requirements.
Because bills must be in print for at least 72 hours before the Legislature can vote on them, lawmakers have until Sunday at the latest to reach a deal that can be passed by the end of the month. Progress toward an agreement this week has been halting, with attention divided by state budget negotiations that face the same deadlines and differing views of how successful California has been in reviving its economy after the worst of the coronavirus pandemic.
While the debate continues in Sacramento, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced on Thursday that it would extend federal eviction protections through July 31 in what “is intended to be the final extension of the moratorium.” California is expected to go further with its renter protections, meaning that the state’s tenants will likely be covered by its own program rules — that is, if lawmakers can come to an agreement.
“We risk a wave of evictions and homelessness that could be completely preventable,” said Assemblymember David Chiu, a Democrat from San Francisco who has advocated extending the moratorium through the end of the year. “The discussion is, how long should we make the extension, and what are the conditions?”
Billions of dollars in federal assistance were supposed to make it easier to figure out a solution. Through two rounds of stimulus, California received $5.2 billion from the federal government to provide relief to lowincome tenants who could not cover their rent because of the pandemic.
The second round of funding prompted state officials to propose covering 100% of the missed rent for eligible tenants — a provision likely to be included as part of an extension of the eviction moratorium. Tenant groups are seeking assurance that renters will have access to the money even if property owners choose not to participate in the process. An initial pandemic housing aid program, approved in January, offers more rent relief to tenants if the property owner is willing to forgive the rest of their debt.
But the money has been slow to flow out through a complicated web of state, county and local rent relief programs, frustrating both tenants and property owners who say the resources are desperately needed. An estimated 135,000 households in the ninecounty Bay Area are behind on rent, according to a National Equity Atlas analysis of U.S. Census surveys, with a debt that has ballooned to some $747 million.
As of Monday, the California Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency told The Chronicle that it had paid just $61.5 million of the nearly $659 million that has been requested so far in counties relying on state rent relief programs.
Tom Bannon, chief executive officer of the California Apartment Association, which represents owners and developers of rental properties, slammed the pace of rent relief payments as “unconscionable.”
During a news conference Tuesday, the organization presented a report that it commissioned from the firm Beacon Economics arguing that another evictions freeze is unnecessary because California tenants are benefiting from business reopenings and improving employment rates. The report pointed to U.S. Census data that showed a decline in late rent payments from 21% in December to 12% in May.
Bannon said that if the Legislature does extend the eviction moratorium, it must be short and only apply to those who can prove that they suffered a financial hardship from the pandemic.
“This isn’t about us being shrill,” he said. “This is about the rental housing industry having done its fair share.”
Tenant advocates reject that view, contending that many families have taken on other forms of debt to keep paying a portion of their rent. Those renters and others who are still out of work, they argue, are in danger of sliding into homelessness if protections expire too quickly.
Several groups have organized their own events featuring renters like 23yearold Luis Fenando Anguiano, a recent UC Davis graduate who briefly lived in his car before moving into a shared Sacramento apartment. After his mother lost her job during the pandemic, he was forced to put graduate school plans on hold to find a job and send money back to his family in Southern California.
“I still haven’t found fulltime work,” Anguiano said, “and I’m still struggling.”
Because the state moratorium only bars evictions for nonpayment of rent related to the pandemic, tenants can still be forced to leave for other reasons, though comprehensive data on evictions is hard to come by. As Bay Area cities like San Francisco and Oakland enact their own ongoing tenant protections, some rent relief programs rely on applicants selfcertifying how they were hurt financially by the pandemic.
In the meantime, affordable housing advocates like Brian Augusta, a legislative advocate for the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, argue that the choice to conduct the negotiations “behind closed doors” with little time for public scrutiny has only led to more uncertainty for those still reeling from the pandemic.
“There’s no excuse for this,” Augusta said. “We’re really playing a game of chicken with peoples’ lives here.”