SR-407-001 (6)
CA RLK:rnsh
C~ty Counc~l ~eetljj
09-25-79
Santa Mtlfca, ~fornla
TO:
Mayor and C~ty Counc~l
'f~"1--tJ{)1
(/3
SEP 2 5 1979
FROB:
C~ty Attorney
SUBJECT:
rroposed Ord~nance w~th Regard to
Age DlscrlDlnatlon In Hous~ng
Introductlon
At the Clty Councll meetlng of August 28, 1979, Clty
CaUDell requested a proposed ordlnanee along wlth alternatlves
relatlng to age d~scrlffilnat1on and falr houslng for chlldren.
Attached hereto lS a proposed orclnanee whleh lS substantlally
the for~ of the draft ordlnance SUbIT-ltted at the CouDell
meet1ng along wlth alternatlves that could be lneluded
1n that ordlnance.
Background
Slnce 1977, the Clty of Santa Monlca has been studY1ng
the lssue of prov~dlng for falr hous1ng for ch11dren and
prohlbltlng age dlscrlWlnatlon.
Recently, our offlce has talked
to representatlves of both falr houslng groups and apartnent
owners aSsoclatlons. Both groups acknowledge that there 15 a
very real housing problem for famllles wlth ch~ldren In Santa
;lon~ca. ThlS proposed ord~nance, ~f enacted, would help reduce
th~s d~scrlmlnatlon agalnst tenants w~th chlldren.
The proponents pOlnt to the urgent need to renedy an
urgent problem, that conditlons vary throughout the state, that
hazards may be addressed on an indlvldual basls, that occupancy
and denslty standards already eXlstl and a publlC vote lS not
necessary where dlscrlmlnatlon 15 concerned. The opponents
VOlce the concern that a C1ty ordlnance is not the most equitable
means to change the sltuation; that that matter is statew1de not
~f3
SEP 2 5 '979
CA RLK:msh
Clty CounCll Meettlf 09-25-79
e
local, that there should be speclal denslty controls, that
bUl1dings wlth hazards to chlldren should be excluded, that
tenants should be allowed to vote, and that the matter should be
resolved by a clty-wlde lnltlatlve.
Slnce 1977, other cltles have adopted varlOUS ordlnances
Wltr. regard to thlS problen. Th1S has o=flce has revlewed the
ordlnances frorr. other Cltles. I= the Clty Councll decldes to
renedy thlS probleIT by ordlnance, lt 1S our feellng that the
proposed draft Sub~ltted at the Clty Councll meetlng has
fewer obJectlonable features and provldes greater flexlbll1ty
than other ordlnances. For that reason, we have drafted an
ordlnance In substantlally the same form as that sub~ltted
for Councll's conslderatlon.
Alternatlves
1. Adopt the ordlnance as subffiltted.
2. Make suggestlons as to an alternatlve ordlnance
and SUb~lt lt to the Clty Attorney dlrectlng him to draft an
ordlnance accordlngly.
3. Adopt another ordlnance WhlCh provldes admlnlstratlve
procedures to effectuate falr houslng.
4. Make suggestlons as to an alternate means of effec-
tuating falr houslng.
Recomrnendatlon
It is respectfully recommended that the ordlnance as
submitted be adopted.
Prepared by:
Rlchard L. Knickerbocker