Victory Alert: Culver City Rejects $1.67 Million for Renters’ Defense Attorneys
Victory Alert
Culver City Rejects $1.67 Million for Renters’ Defense Attorneys
By Janet M. Gagnon, Esq.
Chief Corporate Affairs Officer & SVP, Government Affairs
On April 14th, the Culver City Council voted 2-2 with one abstaining vote to reject a draft ordinance to create an extremely expanded “Right to Counsel” program that would have paid for renters’ defense attorneys costing up to $1.675 Million. Instead, the Council will consider the far less costly, and far more effective alternative of providing emergency rental assistance to low-income renters facing evictions due to sudden illness, injury or job loss. This is a major victory for common sense despite what was a very close vote!
The Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA) vigorously fought against this wrongheaded policy at every step. This time the City Council had finally obtained a cost estimate from Bet Tzedek detailing the “significant expansion” and a draft ordinance from City staff for the program that would have been available to all renters and not limited to those directly impacted by the recent wildfires. Cost estimates included 7 fulltime attorneys, including a managing/directing attorney and 3 paralegals to provide full legal representation to renters facing eviction with a total cost of $1.675 million once fully staffed.
Bet Tzedek estimated that full legal representation of each eviction case requires 41.1 hours of attorney time. According to Stay Housed LA, of which Bet Tzedek is a provider, such representation costs between $250 to $350 per hour. Thus, Culver City would be paying at least $10,250 per case in attorney’s fees. In exchange, the City would merely obtain a possible delay of each eviction rather than preventing the evictions which are predominantly filed due to non-payment of rent.
AAGLA argued that it would be less than HALF the cost for the City to simply pay the rent that is owed by creating a new rental assistance program to avoid evictions entirely. The program could be targeted to low-income renters facing sudden illness, injury or job loss (with a similar program already existing in Claremont). This would guarantee that renters would be able to stay in their existing housing. AAGLA provided data that the average rent owed is $3,750 according to Los Angeles City’s Controller.
Further, Bet Tzedek stated in their report that there are only 272 eviction cases had been filed citywide in 2024, and that figure may be overestimated based on certain zip code areas falling outside of the city. This is 1.1% of all renters in Culver City, which is HALF the statewide average of 2.2% according to The Eviction Lab at Princeton University. Thus, paying the rent owed of $3,750 versus attorney’s fees of $10,250 is a much better spend for the City with a far more certain positive outcome.
Fortunately, Mayor Dan O’Brien and Council Member Albert Vera agreed with this clear reasoning and cost comparison and voted NO on the proposed Right to Counsel expansion and ordinance. Mayor O’Brien stated that the pain suffered on both sides could be better addressed by rental assistance. Council Member Vera recognized that mom-and-pop owners providing affordable housing are hurting and do not sleep on mattresses stuffed with cash as apparently wrongly believed by some Council Members and tenant activists. Both Mayor O’Brien and Council Member Vera stated the importance of fiscal discipline, especially in light of the new sales tax under consideration due to the city’s already stretched budget. Council Member Freddy Puza abstained from the vote, noting that forcing mom-and-pop owners to sell to corporations would be devastating.
However, Council Members Yasmine-Imani McMorrin and Bryan “Bubba” Fish remained steadfastly oblivious to these basic financial realities. Instead, Council Member Fish again repeated the false narrative about renters needing defense attorneys simply because they typically did not have them during an eviction proceeding. Again, he turned a blind eye to the fact that the root problem is not that the renter does not have an attorney, it is that they are unable to pay the rent that is owed (much less an attorney for legal representation after the fact). In contrast, owners must have an attorney according to state law if they hold their properties in a limited liability company for risk management purposes, which most do. As with any lawsuit, including evictions, the only winners are the attorneys who are paid on an hourly basis regardless of whether they win or lose.
Even more disturbingly, while Council Member McMorrin stated that she wanted to keep renters housed, she voted in favor of the Right to Counsel expansion rather than rental assistance. Rental assistance is clearly the better solution to keep renters housed as it eliminates the basis for an eviction by paying for the housing that is being received. In contrast, Right to Counsel merely enriches attorneys by paying their hourly fees to argue about a fact that remains unchanged, the ability of the renter to pay the unpaid rent. Anyone who cares about keeping renters housed should want a rental assistance program as the best solution. Hopefully, in the future Council Member McMorrin will come to this realization when the staff brings back a report on a potential rental assistance program.
We will continue to keep our members update when additional information is brought back on a rental assistance program and encourage our members to reach out to the full City Council in support of such a program being established.
This article is for informational purposes only. If you have any questions regarding your property or specific leasing issues and the requirements of any legal changes described herein, please consult with an attorney.