CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 10 Section Name: {{section.name}} Account Number: 10-3133 File ID: {{item.tracking_number}} TO: City Council
FROM: Alex Khojikian, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
MEETING DATE: April 21, 2025
SUBJECT:
Housing Element Implementation – Anti-Displacement and Tenant Protection Policies RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a presentation and provide direction on how to implement the tenant protection/anti-displacement policies in the 2023-2031 Housing Element.
BACKGROUND:
The City of San Mateo’s 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element) established goals, policies, and programs to facilitate the production of 7,015 housing units and address key housing challenges identified through the housing needs assessment and community input process. The Housing Element was adopted by the City Council on May 20, 2024, and certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on July 23, 2024.
The City identified five overarching goals to guide the Housing Element’s policies and programs. The first three are based upon the “3Ps” framework that seeks to address the region’s housing needs and is endorsed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG):
1.Production of New Housing at all Income Levels, with a Focus on Affordable Housing
2.Preservation of Existing Housing that is Affordable to Lower- And Middle-Income Residents
3.Protection of Current Residents to Prevent Displacement The fourth goal, or “fourth P,” is Promotion of community engagement and public outreach to support social resilience, and the fifth goal is to Affirmatively Further Housing (AFFH). The City committed to either researching or adopting multiple tenant protection policies to further the Protection and AFFH goals.
These policies include expanding certain provisions of Assembly Bill 1482 (AB 1482, also known as the Tenant Protection Act); strengthening existing policies related to substantial remodel evictions and unsafe or substandard units; and research options and best practices for improving data tracking of rental rates, evictions, and displacement. Implementation of these policies began in 2024 and is continuing into 2025/2026. Each Housing Element policy and its implementing actions are outlined in Table 1 below:
Table 1 – Housing Element Policies
Housing Element Policy Implementation Actions
Policy H 3.4: Expand tenant
protections in local ordinance to
extend measures of AB 1482
related to relocation,
a. Extend requirement of documentation from landlords who use the substantial remodel exemption to evict tenants and a Right to Return policy for tenants AB1482 provisions to require tenant relocation payments for No Fault evictions for those with tenure less than one year.
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
documentation, and right to
return policy in eviction cases.
b. Make recommendations to the City Council for establishing tenant protection policies that include the displaced from their homes due to demolition or substantial remodels.
c. Amend the Code to strengthen enforcement penalty structure to aid in protecting tenants from unsafe or substandard units.
d. Conduct outreach to the community on a biannual basis.
Policy H 3.6: Monitor rents,
evictions, and tenant
displacement citywide.
a. Research options and best practices for a rental registry list, including determining necessary financial and human resources needed to establish such a program. Make recommendations to City Council.
b. Collaborate with regional partners, such as 21 Elements or ABAG, to develop ways to monitor rental rates, evictions and displacement citywide and countywide to track trends and use the information to guide policy priorities.
Policy H 5.4.1: Establish tenant
protections in local ordinance to
extend measures of AB 1482
related to relocation,
documentation, and right to
return policy in eviction cases.
a. Extend AB1482 provisions to require tenant relocation payments for No Fault evictions for tenants with tenure less than one year.
b. Make recommendations to the City Council for establishing tenant protection policies that include the requirement of documentation from landlords who use the substantial remodel exemption to evict tenants and a Right to Return policy for tenants displaced from homes due to demolition or substantial remodels. c. Amend the Code to strengthen enforcement penalty structure to aid in protecting tenants from unsafe or substandard units. This item is connected to Policy H 3.4.
Prior Tenant Protection/Anti-Displacement Efforts
Public input from the Housing Element outreach process, feedback from HCD, and City Council direction informed the policies and actions that were included in the City’s Housing Element. In addition, here’s a summary of significant policy activities that have happened in San Mateo related to tenant protections over the past ten years:
•In 2016, a measure was placed on the ballot (Measure Q) that proposed to enact rent regulation and just cause for eviction requirements. Measure Q would have limited rent increases for certain multi-family units to the change in Consumer Price Index (CPI) up to 4 percent annually, among other requirements related to just-cause evictions and relocation assistance. Out of 40,126 votes, 60% of voters voted against Measure Q and 40% voted in favor. •In 2019, following a three-year task force on anti-displacement, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2019-6, which required relocation assistance for tenants displaced from unsafe or substandard units and made key changes to two other existing City policies (see Table 3 below). •Most recently, on August 15, 2022, the City Council held a study session to consider tenant protection policies to be incorporated into the Housing Division workplan. The agenda report, staff presentation, meeting video and other materials from the study session are available on the City’s Public Meeting Portal.
In addition to the above, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy is an important part of the anti-displacement and tenant protection policy backdrop. Jurisdictions with a TOC (three in San Mateo) are expected to achieve TOC compliance by the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) 4 deadline in early 2026 by meeting several policy thresholds. These include standards for density near transit, parking and transportation; a commercial stabilization policy; and at least two affordable housing policies in the areas of production, preservation, and protection.
The list of protection policies can be found at this link.
City Contributions to Housing Assistance
The City currently contributes Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to three organizations providing fair housing counseling (Project Sentinel), housing legal aid (Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County), and core services, including housing case management (Samaritan House). The City provides these funds annually via a joint funding process
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
with the County of San Mateo and other CDBG entitlement jurisdictions. The FY2024-25 CDBG allocations to the three organizations total $53,200.
Tenant Protection and Anti-Displacement Outreach and Research To begin implementation of the above Housing Element policies, staff developed a plan to conduct research and fact- finding and gather input from a wide range of community stakeholders throughout the fall and winter of 2024, working towards a City Council study session on tenant protection and anti-displacement in early 2025. Staff also initiated a formal collaboration with 21 Elements in August 2024, which has facilitated a series of multi-jurisdiction meetings and technical assistance to jurisdictions implementing Housing Element anti-displacement policies and anti-displacement strategies.
Staff began conducting background research in September 2024, including meetings with legal service providers, to obtain information on San Mateo-specific data on evictions and related housing issues. A recurring theme of the research into rental housing conditions in San Mateo is a lack of comprehensive local data. However, there are some indicators that can help to frame the discussion.
Staff reviewed data from the City’s Business Tax License records and CoStar, an online commercial real estate database.
The City’s Business License Tax records contain 1,028 registered rental properties, while the CoStar database shows 1,110 rental properties (note that there is no data on single-family homes on CoStar).
Incomes and Rents
One of the main contributors to displacement in the Bay Area is the combination of high rents and significant income disparities. The Area Median Income (AMI) for San Mateo County has climbed steadily in recent years. At the same time, to the most recent data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Consolidated Housing Affordability Survey (CHAS), 49 percent of renters in San Mateo are in the lower income category, which includes low income (80 percent of AMI) and very low income (50 percent of AMI).
Table 2 below shows average rents by bedroom count according to the website Zumper, along with the income needed to afford rent without cost burden (30 percent of income), the countywide Area Median Income, and low income limits (80 percent of AMI). Average rents for 2-, 3-, or 4-bedroom units require an income higher than the low income limit; rents for 3- and 4-bedroom units require an income that exceeds the AMI.
Table 2 - Average Rents Compared to Incomes
San Mateo
Average Rent Income needed Area Median
Income
Low Income (up
to 80% AMI)
Studio $2,352 $94,080 $130,600 $109,700
1 bedroom $2,706 $108,240 $149,300 $125,350
2 bedrooms $3,609 $144,360 $167,950 $141,000
3 bedrooms $4,948 $197,920 $186,000 $156,650
4 bedrooms $9,993 $399,720 $201,550 $169,200
Source: Zumper, Q2 2025 and CA Department of Housing and Community Development. Occupancy assumption is number of bedrooms plus one.
It should be noted that rents vary significantly across housing type and are dependent on factors such as building class, size, size of units, and number of units.
Of the properties listed on CoStar, the largest share of rental housing consists of properties of 2-5 rental units (42 percent), followed by properties of up to 10 units (37 percent). There is no data on single-family homes. These smaller properties are largely older buildings, with the majority built before 1990. Properties of 50-200 units make up 5 percent of the total and are markedly newer.
These characteristics are notable because rents vary significantly between buildings of different sizes and ages – rents for units in older buildings are, on average, lower than units in newer multi-family developments. Ownership type also varies;
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
there are more individual owners among properties with fewer units, while larger numbers of units tend to be owned by corporate entities. This variation is important to consider when discussing the policies in this report, as different segments of the rental market will respond differently to their implementation.
Evictions
Staff met with legal service providers serving San Mateo clients to obtain data on eviction cases and general trends in caseloads over the last five years. These organizations provide services prior to formal eviction proceedings and legal aid in unlawful detainer (UD) cases. All reported a significant increase in caseloads. For example, Project Sentinel, a non-profit that provides services in fair housing, dispute resolution, and support to tenants facing eviction in San Mateo County, found a 24% increase in their caseload, from 346 cases in 2018 to 428 cases in 2023. Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County reported that their caseload on UDs in 2019 went from 1,120 to 1,520 in 2023, a 35% increase.
This trend can be attributed in part, to the termination of COVID-19 pandemic-related rental assistance and eviction moratoria. At the same time, all organizations stated that AB 1482 (summarized in Table 3 below) has significantly curtailed “no-cause” evictions. The primary reason for most eviction cases is nonpayment of rent.
A study of court records of eviction filings in San Mateo County published in February 2025 by Mills Legal Clinic at Stanford Law School supports these observations. AB 1482 appeared to contribute to a significant drop in “no-cause” evictions, with the vast majority of evictions due to alleged nonpayment of rent. San Mateo (city), with 141 filings, is one of the four San Mateo County jurisdictions with more than 100 UDs in 2019 and 2023 combined, along with Daly City, East Palo Alto, and Redwood City.
Even with comprehensive data on court filings, the extent of residential displacement due to “soft” or “functional” evictions – cases where displacement occurs, but the formal case never reaches the courts – is unknown. The Stanford Law School study also does not provide details such as the type of housing (single-family dwelling, small or large multi-family, older or newer stock), geographic concentrations of eviction filings within San Mateo, or the extent to which evictions disproportionately impact people of color or those of lower income.
Outreach and Community Engagement
In parallel with this research, staff also conducted outreach and community engagement to consult with both tenants and property owners in fall and winter 2024 and 2025; and two community workshops were held through the Community Relations Commission on November 20, 2024 and January 15, 2025. A variety of public comments were received from community stakeholders on potential anti-displacement and tenant protection strategies and programs. A summary of the public comments received in both community workshops can be found in the meeting minutes from the Community Relations Commission in Attachment 1.
In December 2024, staff facilitated five focus group meetings with community stakeholders to gather more input on how housing issues and current policies impact tenants and property owners. Input received included the following:
•Support for policies that increase likelihood that renters can successfully relocate within or in close proximity to San Mateo; in particular, increasing all forms of relocation assistance to three months’ rent. •Support for a rental registry to address a lack of San Mateo-specific housing data that could facilitate policymaking in this area.
•Opposition to a rental registry due to concerns about privacy and administrative burden on property owners and managers to meet extensive reporting requirements.
•Support for a policy that would limit no-fault evictions during the school year. •Emphasis on differences in the ability of larger versus smaller property owners and managers to keep apprised of, and comply with, complex state and local laws.
•Emphasis on the effect of increased regulation on property owners who tend to own smaller, older, and relatively more affordable housing, and who are facing steep increases in costs (insurance, utilities, etc.).
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
•Overarching concern about ability of renters to remain in their San Mateo community. •Support for education and outreach on current tenant protections and available resources and emphasis on providing education and outreach in multiple languages. •Emphasis on the limited supply of rental units impacting rent prices.
Current Protections in State and Local Law
There are many state laws that address various aspects of the rental market and that set the existing policy framework for tenants and landlords. Some relevant policies include:
Table 3 – Current Laws and Ordinances
Policy/Ordinance Description
Municipal Code
Chapter 7.50
Relocation assistance for tenants in unsafe or
substandard units that are temporarily or
permanently displaced due to City Code
Enforcement activities (temporary – actual moving
and temporary housing costs up to three times Fair
Market Rent; permanent – three times Fair Market
Rent plus moving costs). Tenant right of return to
the unit or to a comparable unit.
Municipal Code
Chapter 26.65.060
For units converted into condominiums, stock
cooperatives, or community apartments, tenants
have the right to purchase three months after City
approval. Relocation assistance required (three
times Fair Market Rent).
City Protections
Municipal Code
Chapter 27.02.180
Relocation assistance for tenants in demolished or
converted units (three months’ Fair Market Rent
plus moving costs).
Assembly Bill (AB)
1482 (Tenant
Protection Act of 2019)
Limits rent increases, implements “just cause” for
covered tenancies, and provides relocation
assistance to tenants who are evicted for “no-fault”
reasons. Exempts buildings newer than 15 years
old, single-family homes not owned by a
corporation, and owner-occupied duplexes. Note:
Senate Bill (SB) 567 tightens some AB 1482
provisions by requiring additional landlord
documentation.
State Protections
SB 330 (Housing Crisis
Act of 2019)
Requirement for developers to replace demolished
“protected” rental and affordable housing units,
offer relocation assistance, and offer right of first
refusal to a comparable, new unit. Note: AB 1218
expands the “no net loss” provisions in the Housing
Crisis Act of 2019.
Policy Alternatives for City Council Consideration
The table in Attachment 2 describes various options for the City Council to consider to implement the relevant Housing Element policies and to respond to the findings described in this report. The table identifies each Housing Element policy, briefly describes the problem it is intended to address, discusses potential benefits and costs, and lists jurisdictions with some version of the policy. Policy alternatives are discussed below, with additional details included in Attachment 2.
Relocation Assistance
AB 1482 introduced the requirement of relocation assistance for no-fault, just-cause evictions, which include owner move- in, substantial renovation or demolition, a requirement to vacate the unit related to habitability, or withdrawal of the unit
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
from the rental market. This provision only applies to tenants in covered units who have lived in the unit for one year or more. The purpose of expanding relocation assistance to tenants who have been in the unit for less than one year is to provide the same level of protection afforded by AB 1482 to all tenants evicted for these reasons. Policy alternatives to consider include the amount of relocation assistance provided and the qualifying length of tenure (e.g., no minimum, minimum 3, 6, 9 or 11months).
Right to Return
While AB 1482 addresses relocation assistance, there is no right to return provision for tenants evicted for the reasons stated above. SB 567 provides for the right to return only in cases of substantial renovation where the work is not completed (or never commences). While some of the City’s policies include a right to return, they do not address most no- fault evictions described in AB 1482, and do not apply to demolitions. The purpose of a right to return policy is to provide tenants an opportunity to return to their unit in all of these cases.
Strengthened Enforcement Penalty Structure for Unsafe or Substandard Units As noted above, the City’s existing ordinance on relocation assistance for tenants in unsafe or substandard units that are temporarily or permanently displaced due to City Code Enforcement activities is from 2019. Since adoption, as the ordinance has been utilized, there have been some functional issues and policy limitations that have been identified.
Housing Element Policy H.3.4(c) was included to improve the intended function of the ordinance, including the provision of relocation assistance and the appeals process.
Specifically, for tenants whose temporary displacement becomes permanent, the ordinance does not offer additional, or cumulative assistance beyond three times the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Fair Market Rent (FMR).
This is an important gap to address because of the high cost of living in San Mateo, where three times FMR may be insufficient even in cases of short-term displacement. Based on City implementation of the ordinance, allowing for greater relocation benefits if a temporary relocation becomes permanent would avoid significant finance impacts to tenants who are no longer able to return to their unit. With regards to the processing of an appeal related to a relocation finding, Council provided earlier direction to explore alternatives, including the use of a hearing officer.
Rent Registry
The purpose of a rent registry is to collect data specific on the rental housing stock in a jurisdiction. The level of specificity that a rent registry provides exceeds that of any other data sources, including commercial real estate databases or local sources such as business license records. For example, a rent registry can provide accurate information on the number of rental units, rents charged, and vacancy rates, track unit turnover by category, and track evictions.
To determine what data is currently available, staff reviewed the City’s internal business license tax database and CoStar; some of these results are discussed elsewhere in this report. Both sources help to determine the approximate number of rental properties citywide, but the data is aggregated, provided as averages, and incomplete (no data on single-family homes). While valuable sources of information, they require several assumptions and are best used to identify broad trends in the local rental market.
Several Bay Area jurisdictions have proposed or instituted rent registries. These include the following:
•East Palo Alto: The City of East Palo Alto selected a firm via an RFP process in 2024 and expects to implement a rent registry by mid-2025. The city is leveraging its existing Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction program, which regulates approximately 2,500 of the city’s rental units and includes full-time staff. •Foster City: (pending) A Rental Registry was presented to the Foster City City Council in October 2024 to apply only to the city’s Below Market Rate (BMR) units. Through this rental registry, the city intends to gather additional data to improve the auditing and monitoring process and ensure that tenants and BMR property owners are compliant with the regulations. This is a pilot program.
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
•Half Moon Bay: The City of Half Moon Bay adopted a rent registry ordinance in February 2024 and began registrations in June 2024. This was followed in fall 2024 by implementation of a new rent stabilization program. The stated purpose of the rent registry was to identify how many rental units exist in Half Moon Bay and to track year-over-year changes, including displacement of residents. The rent registry website can be viewed here. •Concord: The City of Concord has an established Rent Registry program for the past four years that collects data on rent amount, property address, size of unit, number of bedrooms and bathrooms, lease terms, and parking spaces. All rental units are required to be registered, including single-family homes. The city releases an annual report each year on its Rental Registry Webpage.
•Palo Alto: In October 2024, the City of Palo Alto launched a Rental Registry Program for rental properties with three or more units. The stated purpose of this registry is to better understand the rental landscape in Palo Alto and help inform future Council decision-making (see link).
While rent registries provide a reliable source of rental information, jurisdictions must weigh this benefit against the costs of establishing and maintaining the registry. Cities must invest in an RFP process to identify a firm that can create the rent registry and budget for significant costs associated with registry set-up and maintenance, annual consultant and software fees, and city staff time. Some cost recovery is possible with a citation system, but this also requires staff time. Below are some examples of rent registry budgets and estimates:
•East Palo Alto budgeted $150,000 for program set-up, with an additional $150,000 on an annual basis. •Half Moon Bay requires $30,000 annually to maintain its rent registry contract, plus one half of a permanent staff position and a full-time temporary position.
•Concord’s program has an average budget of $81,000 per year for the rent registry software. Their program runs on a cost-recovery model using Rent Registry fees to cover the software and personnel. •Through General Funds, Palo Alto budgeted $443,256 over four years to cover software services, one full-time staff position, and other additional services. Palo Alto has the intention to switch to a partial cost-recovery model after the first year.
Emergency Rental Assistance
Receiving an eviction notice due to non-payment of rent can lead to a household becoming homeless. For this reason, several jurisdictions in San Mateo County have implemented their own emergency rental assistance program to help renters avoid missing a month’s rent, utility payments, or security deposits. The household limit for this assistance ranges from $4,000-5,000. Jurisdictions such as South San Francisco, Daly City, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Redwood City, and Brisbane use either General Funds or Housing Successor Funds to make this form of assistance available. The average funding for this is $84,000 annually. The jurisdiction has the option to independently administer the program, or contract with a nonprofit service agency. Payments are issued directly to the property owner.
City Council Direction
Based on the information provided in this agenda report and the policies in the City’s Housing Element, staff is seeking Council direction on the following questions to guide how the City proceeds with implementation.
1. Given the commitment in Policy H.3.4(a) to extending relocation assistance for no-fault evictions for those with tenure less than one-year, which policy alternative would the City Council like to pursue, i.e., qualifying length of tenure and amount of compensation?
2. Would the City Council like to pursue a policy related to right-to-return as described in Policy H.3.4(b), and if so, which alternative should be pursued?
3. Given the commitment in Policy H.3.4(c) to strengthening the enforcement penalty structure of the City’s existing ordinance on relocation assistance for tenants displaced by code enforcement activities, what changes would the City Council like to pursue in an amended ordinance?
CITY OF SAN MATEO
5 5
2 6
4. Would the City Council like to pursue a rent registry, a different model for data tracking, or rely on existing data sources to achieve the goals of Policy H.3.6?
5. Are there other policy alternatives the City Council would like to pursue based on the findings in this report?
6. Does the City Council wish to prioritize any of these items as staff continues with implementation? Next Steps
Based on the direction provided by the City Council, staff will begin drafting the necessary code amendments, policy language or program proposal(s), as necessary, and return to the City Council for further approval of each item. Due to the differing nature of the various policy alternatives, depending on the feedback City Council provides, these items may be addressed in groupings, or as standalone items. Staff is working towards implementing all actions related to Policies H 3.4, H 3.6, and H 5.4.1 by the end of 2025.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The impact on the General Fund and other housing funds will depend on the direction the City Council provides in this study session. Code amendments to reflect updates to an existing ordinance or to introduce a new ordinance will have minimal impact, but there may be costs associated with implementation. As noted above, a rent registry – or any data collection mechanism – will have associated upfront and ongoing costs. Finally, a rental assistance program could be supported out of a restricted Housing fund, such as the Housing Successor Fund (F255), with no impact to the General Fund. Staff will address the budgetary impact of each item when returning to the City Council for further direction or approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This study session is not a project subject to CEQA, because it can be seen with certainty that it will not cause a physical change in the environment. (Public Resources Code Section 21065.) NOTICE PROVIDED:
All meeting noticing requirements were met.
ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Community Relations Commission - Community Workshop #1 and #2 Minutes Att 2 - Policy Alternatives
STAFF CONTACT
Rachel Horst, Housing Manager
(650) 522-7223
[email protected]