Cooling Requirement Coming to Unincorporated L.A. County
Beginning January 1, 2027, landlords in Unincorporated LA County will be required to provide cooling capable of keeping rentals at or below 82 degrees. The ordinance establishes cooling as a housing standard alongside long-standing requirements for heat and hot water.
This does NOT automatically require landlords to provide air conditioning. It DOES prevent landlords from prohibiting renters’ installation of air conditioning.
Landlords in the County, as well as surrounding cities, are well-advised to begin exploring options for cooling down the interiors of their buildings.
Alhambra Triples No-Fault Relocation Payments
Effective in September, the city increased no-fault relocation payments for units subject to the CA Tenant Protection Act (AB1482) from the equivalent of one month’s rent to three months’ rent. Properties with four or fewer units are exempt, except in cases of demolition or substantial renovation, which basically leaves owner/close relative move in as the exception.
Pasadena Rent Registration Fees Due by October 31, 2026
Rental Registration Housing Fee is $236.54 per unit for 2026-2027 fiscal year.
A 7-day grace period is provided through November 7, 2026, for which no late fees will accrue.
| Days Late | Late Period | Percentage | Late Fee Per Unit |
| 8-45 Days | November 8 – December 15, 2026 | 15% | $35.48 |
| 46-90 Days | December 16 – January 29, 2027 | 30% | $70.96 |
| 91 Days+ | January 30 and after | 50% | $118.27 |
Measure Exempting Pacific Palisades from L.A. Mansion Tax Headed for November Ballot
Voters will be asked to exempt the sale of homes damaged or destroyed by the January 2025 Palisades Fire from Measure United to House Los Angeles, known as Measure ULA.
Santa Monica Placing Multiple Rent Control and Tenant Protection Amendments on the November Ballot
The ballot measures include:
Just-Cause Eviction Expansion to Single Family Homes and Condos: Would extend Santa Monica’s RSO just-cause eviction requirements and owner move-ins to include SFHs and condos, which have generally been exempt from rent control under the state’s Costa-Hawkins law.
Nonpayment Eviction Threshold: Would prohibit non-payment evictions until the minimum unpaid balance reaches one month of the Small Area Fair Market Rent (SAFMR) for the applicable zip code.
Administrative Updates: Reaffirms just-cause laws, updates Rent Control Board procedures, and includes a state-required environmental finding.
Santa Monica Has $495 Parcel Tax on November Ballot
Titled the “Excellent Santa Monica Public Schools Parcel Tax Measure,” which was filed by State Sen. Ben Allen, SMMUSD Board President Alicia Mignano, and Community for Excellent Public Schools Chair Ted Winterer, the measure seeks to establish a permanent annual parcel tax of $495 per taxable real property parcel (adjusted for inflation) to provide stable funding for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD).
The measure includes exemptions for qualifying seniors, affordable housing, nonprofits and religious organizations, and bars spending on administrator salaries, land acquisition or capital construction. It requires independent oversight and annual performance audits. If approved, it is estimated to generate about $11 million a year.
The measure is distinct from a competing City Council-proposed parcel tax of $540 intended to maintain city services and school subsidies simultaneously.
ICYMI: As Insurance Skyrockets for Homeowners, State Farm Issues Record Dividend for Auto Policyholders
State Farm is distributing a record $5 billion cash-back dividend to millions of auto policyholders, marking the largest policyholder payout in the insurer’s 103-year history. This one-time distribution is made possible because State Farm operates as a mutual insurance company, allowing it to return profits directly to policyholders rather than outside shareholders.
Long Beach Partners with SCE for Energy-Savings and Express Permitting
The City recently announced its partnership with Southern California Edison and XeroHome to launch a personalized energy portal. This partnership helps Long Beach homeowners discover energy-saving home upgrades that will improve heating and cooling, increase comfort and reduce energy costs. Learn more about local incentives and rebates by entering your home address at xerohome.com.
CA Civil Rights Department Issues Legal Alert on Protections for Emotional Support Animals in Housing
SACRAMENTO – The California Civil Rights Department (CRD) issued a legal alert to reaffirm state protections related to emotional support animals in housing. The alert reminds housing providers and the public of ongoing requirements under state law following the U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HUD) recent reversal of its guidance for enforcing antidiscrimination law at the federal level.
“Emotional support animals provide critical support to people with disabilities all across the country,” said CRD Director Kevin Kish. “While the federal government rolls back civil rights protections, California is staying the course. Housing policies that discriminate against people because of their disability-related need for an emotional support animal do not comply with state law.”
What Changed?
On May 22, HUD, despite having applied its current standard for over a decade, issued new guidance regarding how it will process complaints related to assistance animals in housing. The new federal guidance applies to both service animals and emotional support animals, which are two different types of assistance animals. Under the guidance, HUD indicated it will no longer pursue civil charges in assistance animal cases unless they involve animals that are individually trained to do work or perform tasks directly related to a person’s disability.
In other words, HUD will accept cases involving service animals, which include guide or signal dogs, but not cases involving emotional support animals, which generally do not need to be trained and provide emotional or other forms of support to people with disabilities. As a result, people who rely on emotional support animals across the country will have fewer options to address barriers to housing, including veterans with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or people with developmental disabilities such as autism.
California Stays the Course
Although the federal government has changed its guidance for assistance animal cases under federal law, California is staying the course. California laws that protect the right to request reasonable changes to housing policies, which include the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act, remain unaffected. State law continues to require housing providers to grant reasonable exceptions, where necessary, to ensure people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing. Examples of reasonable accommodations for assistance animals can include waivers of “no pets” policies, pet fees, and breed restrictions.
Los Angeles County Has Filed a Lawsuit Against State Farm
Filed in August, the suit alleges that the insurer engaged in unfair, unlawful, and deceptive business practices regarding claims from the January 2025 Eaton and Palisades wildfires.
The lawsuit claims State Farm mishandled policies through unreasonable delays, systematic underpayments, denials, and refusals to test homes for smoke toxins, effectively creating a “public nuisance” by leaving survivors unable to return to contaminated properties. County officials allege that State Farm violated California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law, citing issues such as repeatedly changing adjusters, lowballing loss estimates, and misrepresenting coverage terms for additional living expenses.
L.A. County Fifth District Supervisor Kathryn Barger said the Office of County Counsel reviewed more than 500 complaints and documents during its investigation, which began in November, of State Farm, many provided by policyholders.
Barger credited the Every Fire Survivors Network and Joy Chen, its executive director, for providing fire survivors’ documents and their stories on being denied payments or going through the runaround, sometimes dealing with repeated changes with adjusters numbering 10 to 15.
She pointed out that those whose homes are standing but have fire, smoke, and toxic contamination faced denial for remediation funding, leaving this group of fire survivors frustrated and overwhelmed.
Chen said 19 months after the fires, two-thirds of the families impacted are still displaced. “And more than half of us are running out of housing funds within the next six months.”
In response to the lawsuit, State Farm released a statement: “State Farm General strongly disagrees with Los Angeles County’s characterization of our wildfire claims response. We will review the lawsuit and respond through the appropriate legal process. Wildfire survivors deserve support, clear answers, and a fair claims process.”
This action follows a separate May 2026 lawsuit by the State of California, which is seeking millions in penalties after the Department of Insurance found State Farm violated state law more than 400 times.
“We are not trying to get in the way of the state. We’re filing because of the evidence we’ve collected showing a pattern of unfair business practices,” said Scott Kuhn, assistant county counsel.
Update on City of Alameda Rental Regulations
The Alameda City Council voted to adopt Ordinance No. 3398 and Resolution 16382, enacting several updates to the City’s rental regulations. Below are some of the most important additional regulations:
TERMINATION OF TENANCY NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
A landlord who terminates a tenancy based on “no fault” grounds such as Owner Move-In or Withdrawal of the Rental Unit from the Rental Market is now required to provide tenants with a copy of form RP-206. This form explains the Permanent Relocation Payments to which the tenant is entitled. When the landlord files the termination notice with the Rent Program, the submission must include a proof of service (RP-204) declaring that the landlord provided the information on relocation payments to the tenant.
BUYOUT AGREEMENT FILING REQUIREMENTS
When a landlord and tenant successfully negotiate a Buyout Agreement, the landlord must file with the Rent Program a copy of the executed agreement. The deadline to do so is now within three business days of the tenant’s signature, regardless of if or when the landlord has countersigned. (AMC 6-58.115(C))
TEMPORARY RENT REDUCTIONS
Landlords who voluntarily reduce a tenant’s rent on a temporary basis must obtain a written statement from the tenant confirming the temporary nature of the reduction. Absent such documentation, the Rent Program will treat the reduction as permanent, limiting future adjustments to the Annual General Adjustment only. (AMC 6-58.60(C); 6-58.35(J))
RIGHT TO RETURN FOLLOWING AN INVALID TERMINATION OF TENANCY
A tenant who vacates a rental unit after receiving an unlawful notice terminating the tenancy now has an explicit right to re-occupy the rental unit at the same rent. The landlord is also required to reimburse all reasonable, documented moving expenses. When re-occupancy is not possible — because, for example, the unit has already been re-rented or the tenant declines — a permanent relocation payment is owed. Landlords must notify the Rent Program of the outcome in writing within 10 days. (AMC 6-58.140(D))
RELOCATION PAYMENT ELIGIBILITY
To qualify for a permanent relocation payment arising from a displacement based on health and safety conditions, a tenant must have been displaced for a minimum of seven days. The tenant is still owed temporary relocation payments for the full duration of any qualifying displacement. (AMC 6-58.83(B))
AFFIRMING EXISTING POLICIES
The council action also affirmed several Rent Program policies, including:
- No landlord may impose a rent increase unless the landlord is in full compliance as to all rental units on the property, including payment of all Program Fees, registration of all rental units, addressing any prior invalid rent increases, and actions required by a Hearing Officer’s order. (AMC 6-58.65(B))
- When a rental property changes hands, the purchaser is responsible for remedying any outstanding violations of the Rent Ordinance, including payment of Program Fees and tenant reimbursements. (AMC 6-58.30(B))
- A master tenant who rents or leases to a subtenant may have obligations under the Rent Ordinance, either solely or jointly with the property owner. (AMC 6-58.15)
- A landlord with a qualifying disability may be exempt from certain restrictions on owner move-ins. (AMC 6-58.80(E)(2) and (E)(7))
- Landlords will not be charged Program Fees for units with rents subsidized by a voucher program, such as Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8). Privately owned units with rents subsidized by other means, such as below-market-rate units developed as part of an affordable housing agreement, are subject to the partially regulated Program Fee. (AMC 6-58.145(B))
SHORT-TERM RENTALS PROHIBITED FOLLOWING A WITHDRAWAL FROM THE RENTAL MARKET
The City Council concurrently rescinded Resolution 15517, which had established the City’s Ellis Act Policy governing the permanent withdrawal of rental units from the rental market. Those provisions are now embodied in the newly adopted Regulation 26-01. The updated regulation includes a new restriction on withdrawn units: They may not be operated as short-term rentals.
UTILITY CHARGES
The City Council also adopted Ordinance 3407 on July 7, 2026, making changes to how landlords of fully regulated units are permitted to charge tenants for utilities. For new tenancies starting on or after August 6, 2026, utilities must be included with rent unless separately metered. For existing tenancies that began before August 6, 2026, the Rent Program is developing a one-time utility adjustment petition process set to launch in early 2027. A more detailed overview of the new ordinance is available on the Rent Program website.
Good News for San Francisco Rental Property Owners: Appeal Court Affirms Ruling Striking Down Prop. M
The California Court of Appeal tentatively affirmed the ruling striking down San Francisco’s Prop. M (Empty Homes Tax). Prop. M imposed escalating taxes on owners of residential units in buildings with more than two units when a unit remained vacant for more than 182 days annually. The court held that the tax conflicts with and is preempted by California’s Ellis Act, which protects a residential property owner’s right to leave the rental business and not offer property for rent. The court rejected San Francisco’s argument that owners could avoid the tax simply by occupying or otherwise using their units, finding that Prop. M effectively imposes a substantial financial penalty on owners who choose to keep residential property vacant. The court concluded that local governments cannot impose such a financial burden on an owner’s exercise of rights protected by the Ellis Act. Because the Ellis Act issue was sufficient to invalidate Prop. M, the court did not decide the plaintiffs’ additional constitutional claims. The judgment prohibiting enforcement of Prop. M was affirmed
FTC: Redfin Must Return To The Apartment Rental Listing Business
Zillow Group settled with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and five state attorneys general on Monday over allegations that a $100 million agreement with Redfin had illegally suppressed apartment rental listing competition.
The ruling is expected to restore more competition in the apartment listings market and drive down costs for property management companies and renters.
“Today’s settlement unwinds an agreement under which Zillow paid Redfin $100 million to stop competing and hand off all its customers to Zillow,” said Daniel Guarnera, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “This kind of payment to a competitor to exit a market and stop competing violates the antitrust laws. This settlement delivers better, quicker, more certain results for both renters and property management companies than we would have been able to achieve after prevailing at trial, including firm and enforceable commitments by Redfin to relaunch its rentals advertising business.”
Under the agreement, Redfin had shuttered its rental ad unit, laid off more than 400 employees, and transferred its advertising customers to Zillow. Rent.com and ApartmentGuide, both Redfin properties, were retooled to carry exclusively Zillow listings.
The FTC and attorneys general from New York, Virginia, Arizona, Connecticut, and Washington argued the arrangement amounted to a competitor buyout.
A government expert estimated that after Redfin’s exit, Zillow customers paid an average of 14.5% more per listing.
The order also requires Redfin to reenter the rental listings market with far more apartment listings and to make enforceable commitments to invest millions of dollars to ensure Redfin will be a far stronger competitor than it was before the 2025 agreement. Restoring competition in the apartment listing market is expected to drive down costs and spur innovation that benefits renters and property management companies.
When FTC first filed suit, it noted that Zillow, Redfin, and CoStar’s Apartments.com collectively control more than 80% of the online apartment advertising market, making any reduction in head-to-head rivalry consequential for lenders and housing finance professionals monitoring multifamily market health.
Seattle WA Passes Rental Fee (“Junk Fee”) Regulations
Effective July 1, 2027, the legislation mandates comprehensive upfront disclosure of all mandatory and optional fees in rental advertisements, listings, and applications, including the total estimated monthly cost.
Banned Fees: Landlords can no longer charge pet rent (recurring monthly fees for pets),fees for mail/package collection, fees for access to common areas (except temporary exclusive use), fees for adding/removing tenants from a lease, or fees for payments via check/money order/ACH. Prohibited Markup: Landlords cannot charge a markup on services provided by third parties; fees must not exceed the actual cost to the landlord.
Allowed Fees: Permitted charges include security deposits (capped at one month’s rent combined with move-in fees), pet damage deposits (capped at 25% of one month’s rent), late rent fees (capped at $10 per month), tenant screening fees, utility charges, and key replacement/lockout fees (limited to actual cost or $50/$150 respectively).
Washington State Landlords Lose COVID Eviction-Moratorium Compensation Case – Filing Appeal With Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein has dismissed a lawsuit brought by rental property owners seeking compensation for losses they said resulted from Washington’s COVID-era eviction moratoriums.
The court emphasized that both Ninth Circuit precedent and Washington State precedent have consistently rejected the argument that pandemic-era landlord-tenant regulations constituted a physical taking of private property.
The case, Cedarland Homes LLC v. Ferguson, had backing from the Rental Housing Association of Washington.
The owners argued that the moratoriums effectively required them to allow nonpaying tenants to remain on their properties and therefore amounted to a government taking requiring compensation.
Washington State’s eviction moratorium began on March 18, 2020, and remained in effect through June 2021 after being repeatedly extended; and Seattle’s eviction moratorium began March 16, 2020, and remained in effect through October 31, 2022. According to the original complaint brought against the State of Washington, Governor Robert Ferguson, King County and several cities, including Seattle (Defendants), the Plaintiffs alleged that statewide and local eviction moratoria barred housing providers from removing residents who were not paying rent and limited their ability for meaningful recourse to mitigate losses, for example, housing providers were not able to collect late fees during the eviction moratoria. There was a limited temporary reimbursement program; however, the housing providers “alleged that it fell short of just compensation required under the United States Constitution.”
Lawyers for the housing providers filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Equity Residential and AvalonBay Communities Have Merged
Equity Residential has completed its merger of equals with AvalonBay Communities, forming Vivmark Residential, the largest multifamily REIT in the U.S. The transaction officially closed on August 17, 2026, and the new entity began trading on the NYSE under the ticker VMRK on August 18, 2026.
The combined company boasts an enterprise value of approximately $69 billion and manages a portfolio of over 184,000 rental apartments. Under the all-stock agreement, AvalonBay shareholders received 2.793 Equity Residential shares per share, resulting in a combined ownership structure where former AvalonBay investors hold roughly 51.2% and former Equity Residential investors hold 48.8%. The merger is expected to generate $175 million in gross operating synergies within 18 months of closing.
San Jose, Campbell, Fremont, Mountain View, Union City, Dublin, and Pacifica are among the cities with apartment complexes involved in the merger, public documents show.
The combined dollar amount for the deals in the Bay Area is at least $911.8 million, records show. At least 2,281 apartment units are involved in the transactions.