Los Angeles City Council members debated a string of competing proposals on Feb. 14 aimed at shielding tenants affected by recent wildfires from eviction and rent debt, but the chamber did not adopt a final ordinance.

The council approved two narrow recommendations aimed at smaller landlords but did not win enough votes to adopt the broader package of tenant protections that had been amended several times on the floor. Councilmembers and dozens of public commenters traded sharply different accounts of the likely effects on small housing providers and wildfire survivors.

Councilmember Eunice Hernandez, who led a series of amendments, said the changes aimed to limit displacement while preventing widespread abuse. “If you do not provide that proof, then you can’t benefit from this,” Hernandez said, describing a requirement that tenants document loss of income tied to the fires.

Supporters said the measure would give people who lost jobs or homes in the blazes time to stabilize and would cap debt to a brief period of unpaid rent. Christina Boyer, an attorney with Public Counsel who identified herself as part of KeepLAHoused, urged the council to act immediately: “There is no moratorium in this motion. There is no rent freeze. There is an affirmative defense in court,” she said during public comment.

Opponents, including several small “mom-and-pop” housing providers and representatives of the California Apartment Association, argued the measure would invite fraud and force property owners to cover months of unpaid rent. Fred Sutton, speaking for housing providers, urged the council to focus on direct rental assistance rather than a moratorium-style protection.

Council members moved multiple amendments on the floor. One amendment (13A) won approval after a reconsideration vote and will be carried forward; two other amendments (13B and 13C) failed. Recommendations numbered 6 and 7 — narrower protections focused on certain small landlords — passed while a councilmember recused herself from those specific recommendations. However, when the chamber voted on the ordinance as amended but excluding recommendations 6 and 7, the measure failed to reach the required support and the council did not adopt the broader ordinance.

After the vote failed, a motion to “receive and file” the item — effectively removing it from today’s calendar and sending it back to the desk — also failed, so the item will appear again on a future agenda. Council members and staff noted that existing emergency rental-assistance programs and Measure ULA funding could be used to support wildfire-affected tenants, but officials said those funds take months to deploy.

Public testimony during the meeting numbered in the dozens and included renters who said the fires cost them wages and jobs, and housing providers who said they risk foreclosure if unpaid rent accumulates. The council’s housing department told members that ULA funding is budgeted for production and other long-term programs and that direct emergency disbursements require additional setup and can take months to roll out.

The measure’s failure leaves a patchwork of temporary protections, local program options and state funds as the primary near-term supports for tenants and landlords affected by the fires. The council signaled plans to reconvene the issue at a later meeting, with several members asking staff to identify fast-start rental-assistance options and stricter verification procedures before returning a revised ordinance to the floor.

Votes at a glance

- Amendment 13A (Hutt): Passed on reconsideration (8 ayes, 3 noes).
- Amendment 13B: Failed on the floor.
- Amendment 13C: Failed on the floor (final corrected tally 5 ayes, 7 noes).
- Recommendations 6 and 7 (narrow landlord protections): Passed while one member recused (10 ayes).
- Underlying ordinance as amended (excluding 6 & 7): Failed on final vote (6 ayes, 5 noes); item remains on the desk for further action.

Why this matters

Council members said the city faces an immediate risk of an evictions spike among people who lost income or housing due to the wildfires, while some landlords warned that a broad, long-running moratorium will accelerate loss of affordable units and encourage corporate buyups. The dispute lays bare a recurring local policy dilemma: how to balance urgent tenant protections after disasters with maintaining incentives for continued private ownership and housing supply.

What’s next

Councilmembers asked staff to return with options to speed emergency rental-assistance disbursements and with clearer verification protocols for eligibility. The item will remain on the council desk and return to a future meeting for further action.