1 25-87994
CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
REPORT TO THE JOINT MEETING: GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL AND
GLENDALE HOUSING AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM
Report: Report on Potential Rental Assistance Programs
1.City Council Motion to Receive and File Report and Provide Direction as Deemed Appropriate.
COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Action Item
Approved for June 3, 2025 calendar
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of financial and rental assistance programs available to Glendale residents, including current and past initiatives, as well as potential future models that have been explored by staff in support of possibly developing a new rental assistance program.
In order to design a program that aligns with Council’s priorities and funding expectations, staff requests guidance on several key elements if Council wishes to move forward with a program, including:
Desired program objectives (e.g., eviction prevention, relocation assistance, or rent relief)
Target population (e.g., seniors, families, tenants facing no-fault evictions) Level of funding commitment
Number of participants
Preferred program structure (e.g., fixed subsidy, or need-based)
RECOMMENDATION
That City Council provide direction regarding a new rental assistance strategy. Clear direction from City Council is essential to shape a program that reflects Council’s goals, priorities, and fiscal constraints. Specifically, staff is seeking guidance on the following:
12 25-87994
6 0
6 0
What is Council’s primary objective? Is the goal to prevent eviction, support relocation, supplement rent for cost-burdened tenants, or promote long-term housing stability?
Who should the City prioritize? Should the focus remain on seniors, students, or working families, or be expanded to include additional vulnerable populations, such as low-income single renters or persons with disabilities not currently served?
What level of funding is Council willing to allocate? Should a new program be designed to assist a large number of households with modest support, or a smaller number with deeper, more targeted assistance?
How many households does Council wish to serve? Staff can model options based on different budget and program structures to provide clarity on trade-offs between reach and impact.
Once Council’s policy direction is established, staff will return with cost projections, eligibility models, and potential administrative frameworks. The design of future programs will also depend on administrative capacity and available partners to deliver services effectively, whether in-house or through contracted agencies.
ANALYSIS
GLENDALE RENTER PROFILE AND HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Rental Market Overview
Glendale is the fourth-largest city in Los Angeles County, with a population of approximately 196,500 residents, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates. According to the same survey, of the city’s over 72,000 occupied housing units, roughly 64% are renter-occupied, representing more than 46,000 households. Glendale’s rental market skews heavily toward higher rent levels: the median gross rent is $2,095, and more than 55% of renters pay over $2,000 per month. Only 6.5% of renters pay under $1,000.
These high rent levels translate into widespread housing cost burden. According to the ACS, at least 63.5% of Glendale renter households spend 30% or more of their income on rent, qualifying as rent-burdened under federal standards. By contrast, only about 27% spend less than 25% of their income on rent. This trend reflects the affordability challenges facing most renters.
Rent Burden Across Age Groups
Rent burden is not confined to a single age group, but certain populations experience it more acutely. Seniors aged 65 and over are the most disproportionately impacted: more than 76% of senior renter households are rent-burdened. Seniors aged 65 and over represent approximately 23% of all Glendale renter households. 13 25-87994
6 0
6 0
Many seniors live on fixed incomes and have limited ability to adapt to rising rents, making them highly vulnerable to even modest housing cost increases.
Among Glendale’s senior population, a significant portion also live with disabilities, compounding their housing challenges. According to the American Community Survey, nearly 57% of residents aged 75 and older and 29% of those aged 65–74 report having at least one disabling condition. The most common limitations include difficulty with mobility, independent living, and self-care.
The largest number of rent-burdened households, however, falls within the 35 to 64 age range, which comprises over 52% of all Glendale renter householders. These working- age adults often support families and may not qualify for senior- or student-specific assistance, despite facing persistent affordability challenges.
Young adults under 35, which account for 25% of all renter households in Glendale, are also significantly affected, with approximately 71.2% experiencing rent burden. This likely stems from lower or unstable earnings due to early career stages, student status, or part-time work. However, this group may have greater future income potential and may benefit from transitional support rather than permanent subsidy.
Income Distribution and Housing Affordability
Income data further underscores these challenges. Nearly 50% of renter households earn less than $50,000 per year, and more than one-quarter earn under $25,000.
Glendale’s median renter income is $60,773, meaning a household would need to pay no more than $1,519 per month to avoid being rent-burdened.
These figures indicate that rental affordability in Glendale is fundamentally mismatched with renter income, even for households earning near the median. The risk of rent burden is highest among extremely low-income renters, and seniors on fixed incomes.
To further illustrate local affordability thresholds, the following chart shows the 2025 income limits for Los Angeles County, as published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These limits are used to determine eligibility for federal and local housing assistance programs, including Section 8 and City-funded subsidies. 14 25-87994
6 0
6 0
HUD Income Limits
Household
Size
1 2 3 4 5 6
Extremely
Low $31,850 $36,400 $40,950 $45,450 $49,100 $52,750
Very Low $53,000 $60,600 $68,150 $75,750 $81,800 $87,850 Low
Income $84,850 $96,950 $109,050 $121,150 $130,850 $140,550 These thresholds demonstrate that a large share of Glendale renters fall within HUD’s very low and extremely low-income categories, especially among seniors, single- adult households, and families in service or entry-level jobs. As Council explores future assistance models, aligning eligibility criteria with these income tiers will help ensure programs serve those most in need.
While ACS data provides a valuable snapshot of housing conditions in Glendale, it should be interpreted with some caution. Census estimates often lag behind real-time market trends and may not capture recent rent spikes or shifts in housing supply.
However, the data offers a reliable overall picture of affordability burdens, confirming that a significant portion of Glendale renters face ongoing financial strain and housing instability.
Regional Context
These challenges are not unique to Glendale; neighboring cities such as Burbank and Pasadena face similar affordability pressures, and the broader Los Angeles region continues to experience a severe shortage of affordable housing. Nationwide, rising rents and stagnant wages have contributed to record-high rent burden rates, underscoring the need for sustained local, regional, and federal responses to housing instability.
CURRENT AND PAST LOCAL HOUSING INITIATIVES
In recent years, the City of Glendale has implemented a mix of federal, local, and emergency housing programs to address affordability and rental instability. These efforts have included both long-term subsidy models and short-term pilots designed to reach vulnerable groups such as seniors, students, and low-income working families. 15 25-87994
6 0
6 0
Key housing assistance initiatives included:
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program: A federally funded, long-term rental subsidy program that supports over 2,600 Glendale households annually.
Despite its impact, access is limited due to a closed waitlist, high demand, and limited federal funding.
Monthly Housing Subsidy Program (MHSP): A temporary local subsidy program for extremely low-income seniors and persons with disabilities. Though impactful, its flat subsidy amount had limited ability to fully address rent burden. Low-Income Student Rental Assistance Program (LISRAP): A temporary pilot partnership with Glendale Community College to provide rental aid and wraparound support to very low-income students. Early results show improved housing and academic outcomes.
Low-Income Family Employment and Rental Assistance Program (LIFERAP): Another temporary program, combines rental assistance with job development for low-income, working, families with children. Designed to help households move toward long-term financial independence. Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP): A federally and state-funded emergency program created during COVID-19 to prevent eviction due to unpaid rent. While effective in the short term, it was time-limited and not structured for ongoing use.
Affordable Housing Development: The City continues to invest in long-term affordability through new affordable housing construction and preservation efforts. These projects increase the supply of deed-restricted units for low- income residents.
Despite these significant investments, gaps remain. Most programs are tailored by age, student status, or work requirements, leaving out many moderate-income renters who still face unsustainable housing costs but don’t qualify for targeted aid. Additionally, while seniors and students have defined programs, younger adults without dependents and low-income single renters may lack access to consistent support. And while Section 8 and MHSP assist seniors, there is still unmet need among the city’s growing population of rent-burdened working-age households, particularly those without access to wraparound services or job advancement pathways.
Closing these gaps may require expanding eligibility criteria, scaling existing models, or piloting new flexible programs that account for the wide range of household types and income tiers struggling to stay housed in Glendale’s high-cost rental market.
A detailed summary of each program is provided in Attachment A, along with a visual comparison chart in Attachment B.
16 25-87994
6 0
6 0
STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROGRAM DESIGN
Given these findings and considering existing programing, future rental assistance efforts should be designed with a targeted and strategic approach.
Targeting by Income and Demographics
Programs should prioritize households earning below 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI), as these renters are the least likely to maintain stable housing without external support. Nearly 50% of Glendale renter households earn under $50,000 per year, with over a quarter earning less than $25,000. With a median rent of $2,095, this level of income places even modest housing out of reach for many families.
Assistance must also reflect the distinct needs of different age groups:
Seniors (65+) are disproportionately rent-burdened, with more than 76% paying over 30% of their income on rent. Many rely on fixed incomes, leaving them vulnerable to even modest rent increases.
Working-age households (35–64) represent over half of all renter households and the largest number of rent-burdened tenants. Despite being employed, many fall through eligibility gaps for student or senior programs. Younger renters (<35) experience high levels of rent burden (71.2%), often due to early-career earnings or educational commitments. Transitional support may help this group build toward long-term stability.
Tailoring assistance to these demographic patterns can help maximize impact and prevent further housing instability.
Disability Considerations
Disability status intersects with rent burden, particularly among Glendale’s senior population. According to the ACS, nearly 57% of residents aged 75 and older and 29% of those aged 65–74 report at least one disabling condition. These conditions include challenges with mobility, self-care, and independent living, which often limit housing options and increase costs.
While seniors represent a significant portion of disabled renters, disabilities also affect younger residents. Programs should be designed to ensure accessibility, provide supportive services, and consider home modifications where needed. Households with disabling conditions—regardless of age—may require enhanced assistance models that combine financial support with service coordination.
Need for Long-Term and Emergency Support
To be effective, future assistance programs could balance short-term emergency support with longer-term stability strategies. Emergency rental assistance can prevent displacement during sudden crises such as job loss, unexpected medical expenses, or 17 25-87994
6 0
6 0
no-fault eviction. These short-term supports are especially useful for renters who typically remain housed but experience a temporary disruption.
At the same time, many Glendale households face persistent affordability challenges due to stagnant wages and rising rents. Long-term subsidies are essential for stabilizing high-need populations, especially seniors, persons with disabilities, and low-income families.
By offering both emergency and long-term rental assistance options through programs like Section 8 and the City’s investment in affordable housing development, Glendale can build a flexible system that addresses immediate threats while promoting housing security over time. Given the City's strong foundation of permanent subsidies and affordable housing units, future programming could prioritize short-term emergency relief to close gaps and prevent eviction at key moments of instability.
Council could also consider refunding and expanding the LIFERAP program, which uniquely combines short-term rental assistance with employment support for low- income working families. Its holistic model aligns with the goal of promoting long-term stability, particularly for households that may not qualify for Section 8 but are still facing housing insecurity.
Leveraging Upcoming LACAHSA Funding
Looking ahead, Glendale stands to benefit from anticipated funding through the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency (LACAHSA). Established under Senate Bill 679, LACAHSA aims to provide enhanced funding and technical assistance for renter protections, affordable housing preservation, and new housing production across Los Angeles County.
Starting in Fiscal Year 2025-26, LACAHSA is expected to allocate approximately $100 million toward prevention initiatives, including eviction legal services, rental assistance, and relocation support for lower-income households. Glendale could potentially receive up to $2.4 million from this program allocation, that can be eligible for rental rights program initiatives, such as emergency rental assistance or relocation benefits for tenants impacted by renovictions and live in units of 4 or less, which are exempt from relocation benefits under the Rental Rights program. These funds can support a broad range of Rental Rights programming with an opportunity to revisit initiatives that were previously proposed but not funded due to fiscal limitations, initiatives like tenant attorney services. The exact funding and requirements will be clarified as LACAHSA finalizes its spending plan and contract documents. Early indications are that funding will only allow for “shallow” subsidies, rental assistance for 6 months or less, to be used as intervention.
While exact allocations and requirements are still forthcoming, the City may be eligible to use these funds for rental assistance. Council could consider introducing a small pilot program using local funds to test the design and effectiveness of a preferred program.
This would allow Council to evaluate outcomes and community impact, and potentially scale up the effort once LACAHSA dollars become available. 18 25-87994
6 0
6 0
Other Considerations
Avoiding Duplication of Assistance
As new assistance models are considered, Council may prioritize renters not already receiving ongoing housing support. Households currently living in affordable housing units already benefit from below-market rent levels in mostly new buildings and, in many cases, receive additional protections. Based on data from Glendale’s existing affordable housing portfolio, approximately 20% of units in eligible properties are already occupied by Section 8 recipients. In some projects, that share is as high as 70%. This overlap underscores the importance of avoiding duplicative subsidies, especially for tenants who are already receiving both rental subsidies and affordable housing benefits.
Extending new financial assistance to these households could reduce the City’s ability to support the broader population of unassisted, rent-burdened renters, particularly those in market-rate housing who lack both rent stabilization and housing subsidies. By targeting resources toward those outside the existing safety net, Glendale can ensure that assistance is both equitable and impactful, reaching those most at risk of falling through the cracks.
Staffing
Staffing is another area that Council should factor when considering a new program.
The scale and complexity of any new rental assistance program will directly impact staffing needs. Programs with broader eligibility, or high applicant volume will require more staff capacity to process applications, verify eligibility, conduct outreach, and monitor compliance. For comparison, Glendale’s MHSP program served approximately 1,200 senior households over 3.5 years with a relatively simple, fixed monthly subsidy of $300. Despite its straightforward design, the program still required dedicated staffing for intake, case management, and administrative support. MHSP, when fully staffed included 1 Senior Housing Analyst (funded through other housing programs), 3 Housing Associates, 1 customer Service Representative and a Glendale Youth Alliance student.
A larger or more complex program, especially one with varying assistance levels, urgent processing timelines, or income/resource verification requirements, may require additional case managers, support staff, and tools to ensure timely and equitable service delivery. Council should consider not only program funding but also the administrative infrastructure needed to effectively implement and sustain any future initiative.
Previously Proposed Assistance Models
In September 2024, staff presented City Council with several potential financial assistance program models aimed at addressing housing instability for Glendale renters (Attachment C). These included fixed relocation grants modeled after the City’s no-fault eviction policy, one-time rent subsidies to cover first month’s rent, and programs to assist with unpaid rent to prevent eviction. Most proposals were designed around a sample enrollment of 150 households and ranged in estimated cost from approximately $500,000 to nearly $3 million, depending on the depth of assistance provided. These models were intended to address both eviction prevention and relocation support, 19 25-87994
6 0
6 0
Council did not adopt any of the proposals at that time. Concerns were raised around the scope, budget implications, and long-term sustainability of the options presented.
In addition to these options, staff has attached a memo (Attachment D) previously circulated providing an overview of the MHSP program and outlining the other potential options for Council consideration. These include targeted programming for highly vulnerable populations such as seniors with adult children who have developmental disabilities, seniors at risk of homelessness, and seniors who lack family support or supplemental income. Each of these groups face unique housing challenges that may warrant a more tailored and focused form of rental assistance.
In addition to the previously presented models, staff has compiled a set of sample program concepts that combine ideas previously reviewed by Council with new exploratory options developed to address gaps in existing support systems. These concepts are provided in Attachment E. The list is intended to help inform Council’s future direction by outlining a broad range of possible approaches.
Financial Modeling Examples
To help frame the discussion, staff offer the following cost examples:
The median renter household in Glendale earns approximately $60,773 annually. To avoid rent burden (paying more than 30% of income on rent), that household should pay no more than $1,519/month. Given Glendale’s median gross rent of $2,095/month, the typical gap is $576/month.
Annual subsidy per household: $6,912
100 households: $691,200/year
1,000 households: $6.91 million/year
If we use the average subsidy of $1,500 per household for Glendale’s federally funded Section 8 program as a basis for our example, the costs would be:
Annual subsidy per household: $18,000
100 households: $1.8 million/year
1,000 households: $18 million/year
And finally using LIFERAP’s average $1,000 a month per household, we get a cost of:
Annual subsidy per household: $12,000
100 households: $1.2 million/year
1,000 households: $12 million/year
110
25-87994
6 0
6 0
CONCLUSION
Over the past two decades, Glendale has supported thousands of low-income households through a combination of long-term federal subsidies (such as Section 8), locally funded rental assistance programs (including MHSP, LIFERAP, and LISRAP), short-term emergency aid, and the development of deed-restricted affordable housing units. While participation levels vary by program, collectively these efforts reflect a sustained municipal commitment to promoting housing stability and responding to the evolving needs of renters.
Today, Glendale continues to serve more than 6,000 low-income households across these programs, representing approximately 13% of all renter households in the city or 1 in every 8 renter household. These figures reflect only the assistance administered directly through City-managed programs. Many Glendale residents also receive support through state, federal, and nonprofit programs that are not tracked locally, meaning the full extent of housing assistance may be even greater.
Glendale has made considerable investments in rental assistance and affordable housing, helping stabilize thousands of low-income households. However, rent burden remains widespread across all age groups and income levels, particularly among seniors, persons with disabilities, and working families. While federal programs like Section 8 provide long-term stability for some, gaps persist due to high demand, and limited resources.
STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
No Stake holder outreach was obtained for this informational report.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. Fiscal impacts may vary based upon Council direction on future programing.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
Not applicable.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: City Council may adopt a motion providing direction on the suggestions made for possible new rental housing programs.
Alternative 2: City Council may elect to consider any other alternative not proposed by staff.
111
25-87994
6 0
6 0
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Submitted by:
Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development
Prepared by:
Sipan Zadoryan, Housing Supervisor
Peter Zovak, Assistant Director of Community Development Approved by:
Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager
EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Current and Past Local Housing Initiatives Attachment B – Current and Past Local Housing Initiatives Chart Attachment C – Financial Assistance Programs
Attachment D – Monthly Housing Subsidy Program Memo
Attachment E – Potential Program Concepts for Council Consideration