A proposed state legislation in California could make it easier for pet owners to find rental housing by banning blanket no-pets policies and prohibiting landlords from charging additional fees for common companions like cats and dogs. This bill aims to address the lack of pet-friendly units that is causing renters to struggle to find housing or give up their pets to overcrowded shelters. Supporters of the bill argue that it would also allow tenants with unapproved pets to come out of the shadows. However, landlords are concerned about the potential cost of repairs, liability issues, and nuisance problems associated with allowing pets in rental units. They are advocating for higher security deposits to cover any damages caused by pets.
The proposal, authored by Assemblymember Matt Haney, would not require all landlords to accept common household pets but would require them to provide reasonable justifications for denying a pet. Landlords would be prohibited from inquiring about pets until after approving an applicant, and tenants would have to notify landlords if they have a pet or plan to get one at least three days prior to signing a lease. The bill would also prevent landlords from charging additional rent or security deposits for pets and would apply to new leases starting on or after Jan. 1. Some landlords believe that decisions about pets and deposits should be left to property owners and tenants rather than being mandated by politicians.
Assemblymember Isaac Bryan shared his personal experience of being shut out of renting several places due to his well-behaved Great Dane, showing how the barrier of having a companion animal can lead to housing insecurity and homelessness. Animal welfare groups, including Oakland Animal Services, have seen a significant increase in the number of people giving up their pets since the end of the city of Oakland’s eviction moratorium. The shelter is averaging 350 dogs relinquished each month, indicating a growing need for pet-friendly housing options. The bill has received support from various groups and is set for a floor vote in the Assembly before moving to the Senate for consideration.
Landlords like Ivan Blackshear in Chico argue that decisions about pets and deposits should be left to property owners and tenants rather than being mandated by legislation. Some landlords believe that allowing politicians to dictate these terms could drive small investors and mom-and-pop landlords out of California, ultimately worsening the high cost of rent. The concerns raised by landlords include potential damage to rental properties by pets, liability issues related to pet behavior, and the impact of nuisance problems on other tenants. They are calling for more flexibility in making decisions about pets and deposits to ensure the safety and well-being of all tenants.
Despite the pushback from landlords, supporters of the bill believe that it is necessary to address the lack of pet-friendly housing options and prevent pet owners from facing barriers to securing rental housing. The bill aims to strike a balance between the rights of landlords to protect their properties and the needs of tenants to have their pets with them. By prohibiting blanket no-pets policies and additional fees for common companions like cats and dogs, the legislation could create more opportunities for pet owners to find suitable housing and avoid having to part ways with their beloved pets. The bill is expected to undergo further debates and discussions in the legislative process before potentially becoming law.
