ITEM 8-D

City Council Meeting 2-2-99

Santa Monica, California

TO: Mayor and City Council

FROM: City Attorney

SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Providing Eviction Protections To Tenants With Pets

Introduction

At several meetings, including its meeting of January 26, 1999, the City Council has heard testimony from members of the public about situations involving evictions based upon the fact of pet ownership, rather than upon any adverse consequences of the pet's presence. Those testifying urged that pets were being used as an excuse to evict and that tenants should not be forced to choose between their housing and their pets. In response, the Council directed legal staff to draft a measure which affords some protection against such evictions. The accompanying ordinance fulfills Council's direction by establishing a defense which would be available to tenants in certain situations but would also protect the landlord's ability to protect the premises and the quiet enjoyment of other tenants.

Background

The City Council has previously adopted various ordinances intended to eliminate unfair discrimination in the provision of housing. Thus, the Santa Monica Municipal Code ("SMMC") prohibits discriminating against tenants with children. SMMC Chapter 4.28. The code also prohibits housing (and other) discrimination based upon sexual orientation, domestic partnership, and AIDS. SMMC Chapters 4.40 and 4.52. A number of other cities have adopted similar protections; and, of course, federal and state law also prohibit discrimination in housing.

In recent years, the state and some cities have also adopted laws intended to address discrimination against tenants with pets. The first protections applied to tenants who depend on dogs for guidance, signaling or service. Civil Code Section 54.1. Later, statutory protections expanded to protect the right of seniors and those requiring supportive services to have pets in rental housing owned and operated by public entities. Health and Safety Code Section 19901. Similarly, the legislature recently passed a measure which would protect the right of disabled and certain other condominium owners to have pets, subject to reasonable restrictions. AB 2020. On the local level, the Los Angeles rent control law prohibits a landlord from changing the terms of a tenancy to prohibit pets and then evicting a tenant in violation of the prohibition, unless the pet is a nuisance. Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 151.09D.

Courts have also begun to recognize that certain tenants may have a right to keep pets. Thus, a federal court has held that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires that a public agency landlord allow a tenant with an acute psychological dependency upon her dog to keep the dog notwithstanding a policy against pets. Majors v. Housing Authority, 652 F.2d 454 (5th Cir. 1981).

This trend in the law is based, in part, upon increasing societal recognition of the many benefits of pet ownership, particularly to the elderly, children, the disabled, and those who live alone. Studies have shown that these benefits include improved physical and mental health and longer life. Growing evidence of the benefits of pet ownership has caused closer scrutiny of the exact impact of tenants' pet ownership upon landlords' property rights. According to a U.C. Davis School of Veterinary Medicine study, "problems with noise, personal injury, or property damage have not resulted" from allowing elderly and disabled renters to have pets in public housing projects.

Discussion

The proposed ordinance would establish a defense available to some tenants facing eviction based upon ownership of a dog, cat, bird, or small aquatic animal. At the same time, the proposed ordinance would recognize both existing legal limitations upon pet ownership and the rights of landlords and others.

Specifically, the proposed ordinance would prohibit threatening to commence or commencing eviction proceedings on the grounds that the tenant has violated the provisions of a rental agreement by keeping a pet or pets except in circumstances where possession of the pet is otherwise not lawful or is an actual detriment to others. This exception would apply where possession is itself illegal (as with unpermitted wild animals) or where the manner in which the pet is kept violates health or humane laws.

Eviction would also be allowed if the pet constituted a threat to the health or safety of other individuals, interfered with others' quiet enjoyment, or otherwise constituted a nuisance. This exception would cover a range of situations including, for example, a tenant keeping too many pets or a persistently noisy pet.

Finally, evictions would be allowed if the pet caused significant physical damage to the property of others. This exception would cover situations where the pet caused significant damage to the premises or to the property of other tenants.

Budgetary Impact

The proposed ordinance would have no budgetary impact.

Recommendation

If the Council wishes to adopt a measure intended to protect residential tenants against evictions based solely upon pet ownership, staff recommends adoption of the proposed ordinance.

PREPARED BY: Marsha Jones Moutrie, City Attorney

Barry Rosenbaum, Senior Land Use Attorney

Claudia Thompson, Administrative Assistant

CA:f:\atty\muni\laws\barry\pets

City Council Meeting 2-2-99 Santa Monica, California

Ordinance Number ____ (CCS)

(City Council Series)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA ADDING CHAPTER 4.64 TO THE SANTA MONICA

MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE EVICTION PROTECTION

TO TENANTS WITH PETS

WHEREAS, pet companionship has been shown to have a beneficial impact on the pet owner's physical and mental health; and

WHEREAS, pets can particularly benefit seniors, children, the disabled, and those who live alone; and

WHEREAS, numerous studies have shown that senior citizens who have pets live longer, go to the doctor less often, recover more quickly from illnesses, and have a more positive outlook than those who do not; and

WHEREAS, the experience of caring for a pet during childhood can enhance the growth of children, making a child more sensitive to the feelings and attitudes of others, inculcate tolerance, and provide an early lesson in the facts of life and death; and

WHEREAS, federal law prohibits discrimination in housing against disabled persons and requires that landlords make "reasonable accommodations" for the disabled; and

WHEREAS, a federal appeals court has held that the requirement to make "reasonable accommodations" includes allowing a person with an acute psychological dependency on his or her dog to keep the dog despite a landlord's no pet policy; and

WHEREAS, the City has a continuing commitment to preserving and enhancing the quality of life for all City residents, including seniors, children, the disabled and those who live alone; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has heard extensive testimony from members of the public about tenants being evicted simply because of pet ownership, rather than any adverse consequences associated with the pet; and

WHEREAS, given the shortage of available rental housing in the City, evicting tenants simply because of pet ownership denies pet owners access to the predominate form of housing in the City; and

WHEREAS, the City is committed to ensuring that pet owners have the same opportunity to retain housing in the City as non-pet owners and that existing tenants are not unfairly forced to chose between keeping their pets or their home,

NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Chapter 4.64 is hereby added to the Santa Monica Municipal Code to read as follows :

Chapter 4.64. PET OWNER EVICTION PROTECTIONS

Section 4.64.010 Statement of Policy.

Many tenants have been evicted simply because they own pets and irrespective of whether the pet has caused any adverse impact. Such evictions deprive pet owners of full access to the predominant form of housing in the City and prevent tenants, including seniors, children, and the disabled, from enjoying the substantial benefits and rewards of pet companionship or risk losing their home. For these reasons, a no pet policy is detrimental to the health and welfare of this community.

Section 4.64.020 Definitions.

The followings words or phrases as used in this Chapter shall have the followings meanings:

(a) Person. Any person as defined in Municipal Code Section 1.12.150.

(b) Pet. Any domesticated bird, cat, dog, or aquatic animal kept within an aquarium.

(c) Tenant. A tenant, subtenant, lessee, sublessee or any other person entitled under the terms of a rental housing agreement to the use or occupancy of any rental housing unit.

Section 4.64.030 Prohibited activities.

It shall be unlawful for any person renting or leasing any housing accommodation, or any authorized agent or employee of such person, to do or attempt to do the following:

Threaten to commence or commence eviction proceedings against any tenant on the grounds that he or she has violated the provisions of a rental agreement where the violation consists of keeping a pet(s) in the unit unless: (1) possession of the pet is otherwise not lawful, including, but not limited to, being in violation of humane or health laws; (2) the pet constitutes a threat to the health or safety of other individuals, interferes with their quiet enjoyment, or otherwise constitutes a nuisance; or (3) possession of the pet has resulted in significant physical damage to the property of others. An action to evict in violation of this Section may be asserted as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action. Nothing in this Section shall relieve a tenant from any liability otherwise imposed by law for damages caused by such pet when proof of same exists.

SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to affect the provisions of this Ordinance.