The Ordinance

Santa Barbara does not yet have a permanent rent stabilization ordinance in force. What it has today is a temporary rent-increase moratorium (Ordinance No. 2026-6206), in force since February 26, 2026, which freezes rents for covered units at their December 16, 2025 levels through December 31, 2026. The permanent ordinance now awaits a final vote. On September 29, 2026, the council introduced it, 4–3: two new chapters of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code, Chapter 26.90 (Residential Rent Stabilization) and Chapter 26.100 (Residential Rental Registry), written to the direction the council gave on September 22. The City Charter requires a separate adoption vote at a later regular meeting at least five days after introduction; the next regular meeting is October 6. If adopted then, the ordinance takes effect 30 days later, and its rent limits apply from January 1, 2027, starting with an annual adjustment of approximately 2.1%. Read the ordinance as introduced (PDF).

Status as of September 29, 2026.

What the council did on September 29 (Item 2; staff report; video). The City Attorney's Office brought back the ordinance rewritten to the September 22 direction. At the start of the meeting the council moved the item off the consent calendar to the end of the agenda, to make room for public comment (video). After public comment, it took two roll-call votes:

• Introduction — passed 4–3 (video; Ayes: Harmon, Santamaria, Sneddon, Gutierrez; Noes: Mayor Rowse, Friedman, Jordan). Councilmember Harmon moved to introduce the ordinance as drafted, per the staff recommendation, and to direct staff to explore ways to improve habitability protections, "including through the just cause ordinance and other mechanisms," returning if those fall short. Councilmember Santamaria seconded. The text was not changed; KEYT reported that most public speakers asked the council not to exempt Section 8 units, and that any change would have delayed adoption.
• $500,000 start-up resolution — passed 4–3 (video; same Ayes and Noes), on a motion by Santamaria, seconded by Harmon. It allocates $500,000 from the Measure I Flexible Housing and Homelessness Fund; the staff report says it got no action on September 22.

Read the ordinance as introduced (PDF), or the City's copy.

The staff report lists four changes from the September 22 draft, each directed by the council that night:

• the provision covering single-family homes and condominiums owned by corporations is deleted;
• a new §26.90.015 adds exemptions from staff's September 22 list, without "tourist homes" or student housing;
• one tenant member of the Rent Stabilization Board must be 65 or older; and
• the rental registry no longer asks for the number of tenants in a unit.

Our word-by-word comparison of the two texts found one change the report does not list: the capital-improvement categories now name solar roof systems and gas-to-electric conversion as examples. The section summaries below reflect all of them.

What the council decided on September 22 (Item 12, video). Staff presented the introduction draft and a $500,000 start-up budget resolution. The council nearly deadlocked over exemptions: Councilmember Harmon called exemptions for deed-restricted affordable units and Housing Choice Voucher tenancies "a red line" for her support, and Councilmember Santamaria would accept them only if those tenants kept access to the rent board for habitability petitions. The council acted in three roll-call votes:

• Direction on the final text — passed 4–3 (video; Ayes: Harmon, Santamaria, Sneddon, Gutierrez; Noes: Mayor Rowse, Friedman, Jordan). The motion approved the staff recommendation with these changes, as staff restated them before the vote (video): the rental registry will not collect the number of tenants in a unit or other personally identifiable tenant information; at least one tenant member of the Rent Stabilization Board is to be a senior; "tourist homes" and the fraternity, sorority, and student-housing items come out of staff's optional exemption list; and the draft's provision covering single-family homes and condominiums owned by corporations is removed, after the City Attorney's Office advised it carries preemption risk under state law (Costa-Hawkins).
• Two added exemptions — passed 4–3 (video; Ayes: Harmon, Friedman, Jordan, Sneddon; Noes: Mayor Rowse, Santamaria, Gutierrez). Exemptions proposed by the Housing Authority and set out in staff's Attachment 1: deed-restricted affordable units owned, operated, or managed by a public agency or nonprofit, and Section 8 voucher units whose contract rent is at or below the Housing Authority's payment standard, for as long as the unit stays in the program.
• Substitute motion — failed 3–4 (video; Ayes: Santamaria, Gutierrez, Sneddon). It would have made the same changes and added the same exemptions while keeping exempt tenants' access to the Rent Stabilization Board.

None of this was final that night. The City Administrator told the council it was "actually not introducing the ordinance tonight," and staff confirmed the votes were "not a final action" (video); the directed changes appear in the text introduced September 29. Staff had also recommended a resolution appropriating $500,000 from the Measure I Flexible Housing and Homelessness Fund for start-up costs; per the September 29 staff report, no action was taken on it that night. The quotes from this session are on The Council Record (q088–q104).

---

Where things stand

The current effort dates to a September 29, 2025 council memorandum from Councilmembers Santamaria and Sneddon (with the RDN 2025 Rent Survey for the South Coast attached), followed by a city press release, "Preliminary Policy Discussions Begin on Rent Stabilization" (December 18, 2025).

On December 16, 2025, the council held its policy-direction session (Item 12, video; staff presentation on file, via docs.santabarbaraca.gov). Councilmembers gave staff feedback on the fundamental policy questions — coverage, the cap, pass-throughs, a board, a registry — targeting adoption by July 2026 and program launch in January 2027. The one formal action passed 4–3 (Noes: Friedman, Jordan, and Mayor Rowse): a direction to return in January with a rent-increase moratorium ordinance, including a rollback date. That meeting date — December 16, 2025 — later became the base-rent date for both the moratorium and the draft permanent ordinance.

On January 13, 2026 (Item 14, video), the council took three roll-call votes. The motion to adopt the moratorium as an emergency/urgency ordinance failed 4–3 — urgency requires five votes (Noes: Mayor Rowse, Friedman, Jordan). The motion to introduce the moratorium as a regular ordinance passed 4–3, and a companion just-cause/"Ellis Act" ordinance (adding SBMC §26.50.100) was introduced 4–3, with the same three dissents on all three votes.

On January 27, 2026 (pulled Item 2, video), the council adopted both ordinances on second reading, 4–3 (Noes: Mayor Rowse and Councilmembers Friedman and Jordan): Ordinance No. 2026-6206, the Temporary Rent Increase Moratorium, and Ordinance No. 2026-6207, the just-cause/Ellis Act amendment. The moratorium took effect February 26, 2026. It froze base rents at the December 16, 2025 level and expires on the earlier of a permanent rent-stabilization program's operative date or December 31, 2026. The moratorium is now the subject of litigation against the City (see Open questions below).

On March 17, 2026 (Item 3, video), the council approved, 4–3 (Noes: Councilmembers Friedman and Jordan, and Mayor Rowse), a $65,105 agreement with consultant RSG, Inc. (Resolution No. 2026-019; Agreement No. 30007) to support development of the ordinance and program.

On April 7, 2026 (Item 14, video; staff report on file), the council selected the centerpiece of the program in a series of straw votes: a rent cap of 60% of CPI or 3%, whichever is lower, one increase per 12 months — passed 4–3 (No: Friedman, Jordan, Rowse). The same 4–3 alignment carried no rent banking, exemptions only as mandated by state law, a comprehensive petition framework, an independent hearing officer with appeal to a board, a comprehensive rental registry, and related directions. Staff was directed to return with a working draft before a 30–45 day public comment period.

On May 19, 2026 (Item 10, video; staff report, "Additional Research on Rent Stabilization," on file), staff presented supplemental research, including RSG's preliminary program-cost estimate: roughly $2 million per year to administer — about $154 per unit across roughly 13,000 covered units. No vote was taken; the April 7 direction stood. Staff also corrected the record that 60% of CPI is not the majority approach among comparable programs.

On June 9, 2026 (Item 14, video; staff report, "Review of Draft Ordinance," on file), the council reviewed the draft of Chapter 26.90 and opened the 30-day public comment period running June 10 through July 10, 2026. No vote was taken on the ordinance itself; the item's only formal vote — to release the related Just Cause/Ellis Act amendments for public comment alongside the rent stabilization ordinance — passed 4–3 (Friedman and Jordan abstaining; Rowse dissenting). The Public Review Draft of SBMC Chapter 26.90 was published June 10, 2026.

On July 28, 2026 (Item 23, video), the council closed out the comment period: staff summarized the 655 written comments received (expressly not tallied for or against) and the council gave drafting direction by straw vote across a 127-item amendment matrix — no roll-call motions were taken. Directions included narrowing the exemptions to those state law requires plus housing-authority/government-operated units ("Option B"); striking the owner-occupied-duplex exemption; deferring the deed-restricted-affordable and Section 8 exemptions for staff analysis; registering all rental units (phased, covered units first — with staff's own warning that this may push owners of unpermitted units to end tenancies rather than register); the rent board limited to recommending regulations, subject to council approval; and keeping the MNOI fair-return standard with small language changes. Staff disclosed that the program's fee structure would be set later by separate resolution, following a third-party fee study then being procured, and the city attorney's office cautioned that several directions required constitutional vetting.

On September 15, 2026, per the September 22 staff report, the council approved the program's first staff position, a Rental Housing Program Manager.

On September 22, 2026 (Item 12, video; staff report), staff brought the introduction draft, prepared by the City Attorney's Office from the July 28 direction. Staff described it as retaining the Public Review Draft's core: the December 16, 2025 base rent; the 60%-of-CPI-or-3% annual adjustment; one increase per 12 months; the January 1, 2027 operative date; the capital-improvement pass-through cap; and a seven-member Rent Stabilization Board with a four-vote threshold. Within that frame the ordinance was reorganized and expanded: exemptions cut from nine to three; the owner-occupied-duplex exemption deleted; the Rent Stabilization Board restructured as a tenant-majority body; the rental registry moved into a new, freestanding Chapter 26.100 covering all residential rental units citywide; a new capital-improvement-plan pre-approval process; a consolidated tenant-notice requirement; and refinements to the fair-return, tenant-petition, and enforcement provisions. Staff also revised the cost picture: the May estimate of about $2 million, or $154 per unit, "will increase significantly," and a fully implemented program is now projected at 7.00 to 9.00 full-time positions and $2.0 million to $2.4 million a year, with full cost recovery not expected in the early years. The council then directed the final changes summarized in the box above, by two 4–3 votes.

On September 29, 2026 (Item 2, video; staff report), the council introduced the redrafted ordinance, 4–3, and adopted the $500,000 Measure I start-up resolution. The staff report, from Assistant City Attorney Daniel Hentschke, lists four changes from the September 22 draft, all made at the council's direction; the section summaries below reflect them.

That is where the process sits today: the ordinance has been introduced and awaits its adoption vote, expected October 6, and covered rents stay frozen at their December 16, 2025 levels through December 31, 2026. The Just Cause/Ellis Act amendments to Chapter 26.50 will return separately "later this Fall," per the September 22 staff report.

---

Rents between now and January 1

For covered units, rents stay frozen at their December 16, 2025 levels through December 31, 2026. The temporary moratorium, Ordinance No. 2026-6206, bars any increase in base rent while it is in force, and it ends on December 31 or when the permanent program begins, whichever comes first. It covers units with a certificate of occupancy issued on or before February 1, 1995, with exemptions much like the permanent ordinance's. A cut in housing services without a matching cut in rent counts as an increase.

• New tenancies. When a unit is lawfully vacated, state law lets the owner set the starting rent for the next tenancy, during the freeze and after it.
• Increases taken after December 16, 2025. An increase taken before the freeze began on February 26, 2026 can stay in place, but under both ordinances it counts against the increases the permanent program allows until they catch up.
• From January 1, 2027. If the ordinance is in effect, owners of covered units may raise rent once in any 12 months by the annual general adjustment, about 2.1% for 2027, with at least 30 days' written notice that also tells the tenant about the ordinance. Larger increases take an approved fair-return or capital-improvement petition.
• Units outside the local rules, such as those built on or after February 1, 1995 and most single-family homes and condominiums, are not frozen. Many are covered by the state's rent cap, AB 1482, which allows up to 8.6% for increases between August 2026 and July 2027.
• If the ordinance is delayed or suspended, the freeze still ends December 31, 2026 by its own terms.

This is general information, not legal advice; check with counsel before serving a rent-increase notice.

---

What the ordinance says, section by section

Everything below summarizes the ordinance as introduced on September 29, 2026, the text attached to the Item 2 staff report (read it as a PDF). It is not yet law: it takes effect only if adopted, 30 days after adoption. Where a provision carries forward unchanged from the June 10 Public Review Draft, we say so. Section numbers are the ordinance's own.

§ 26.90.010 — Application (coverage and exemptions)

The chapter applies to "all residential rental units in the City except" three categories, down from nine in the Public Review Draft; §26.90.015, below, then adds five more.

1. New construction. Units with a certificate of occupancy issued — or final inspection completed — "on or after February 1, 1995" are exempt. This is unchanged.
2. Separately alienable units. Single-family homes and condominiums are exempt, with two carve-backs: a unit whose prior tenancy the owner terminated by notice (Civil Code §§1946.1 or 827), and a condominium not yet sold separately by the subdivider. The introduced text deletes the September 22 draft's third carve-back, which would have covered units owned by a real estate investment trust, a corporation, or an LLC with a corporate member; the City Attorney's Office had told the council that no case law settles whether Costa-Hawkins preempts it and that "there is a risk if you include it."
3. Mobilehome and recreational vehicle parks subject to Chapter 26.08.

Subsection B now requires the landlord of an exempt single-family home or condominium to give each tenant or prospective tenant written notice that the unit is exempt, citing the specific basis, along with the lease offer that §26.40.010 already requires.

The Public Review Draft's exemption for owner-occupied duplexes is gone, so those units are covered. So is student housing, which the moratorium had exempted when a college or university owns it.

§ 26.90.015 — Additional exemptions (new)

Added at the council's September 22 direction from staff's optional list, without "tourist homes" or the fraternity, sorority, and student-housing items. Also exempt:

1. Short stays. Rooms in hotels, motels, inns, lodging and rooming houses, boarding houses, and similar lodging, including lawfully permitted short-term vacation rentals, for stays of 30 days or fewer. Moving a guest to another room, re-registering, or stacking short agreements does not restart the count.
2. Institutional and treatment housing. Hospitals, convents, monasteries, extended medical care facilities, asylums, and nonprofit homes for the aged; and housing that depends on a client's participation in a treatment or recovery program, where the client was told in writing at the start that it is temporary.
3. Deed-restricted affordable units owned, leased, operated, or managed by a public agency or nonprofit under a recorded covenant requiring rents affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate-income households.
4. Section 8 units, for as long as the unit is in the program and its contract rent is at or below the payment standard set by the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Barbara.
5. Government units that federal or state law specifically exempts from municipal rent control.

Landlords of these units owe tenants the same written exemption notice as under §26.90.010(B). Exempt units still register under Chapter 26.100.

§ 26.90.020 — Definitions

The definitions carry most of the program's mechanics.

• Base rent is unchanged: "the rent for a rental unit in effect on December 16, 2025" for tenancies that began on or before that date, and for later tenancies the initial rate set in accordance with state law. A new sentence makes the December 16 base rent apply "notwithstanding any provision of any new or amended rental agreement" that purports to set a higher rent.
• Base year for fair-return purposes remains "the 2025 calendar year," resetting after each granted adjustment.
• CPI remains "the California Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for All Items as published by the Department of Industrial Relations" (DIR), switching to a metro CPI-U if one covering Santa Barbara County is ever published. The change in CPI is measured April-to-April and "shall be rounded to the nearest one-quarter of 1 percent."
• New and broadened terms. "Rent increase" now expressly includes "any reduction, suspension, or termination of any housing service unless there is a simultaneous and corresponding reduction in rent." "Housing services" now names HVAC, internet, telecommunications, sewer, refuse, access rights, and the right to keep a specified number of pets. "Rent" now includes the value of any non-monetary consideration.
• Capital improvement is tightened. It must have a useful life of five years or more and be amortizable under federal income tax law. It may not primarily relate to an amenity tenants pay for separately. It excludes work done to correct any government notice ordering repairs, and it excludes improvements completed before December 31, 2025.

One drafting error persists from the Public Review Draft: the definition of fair return still points to "the standard outlined in Section 26.90.060," but the maintenance-of-net-operating-income (MNOI) standard appears in §26.90.050; §26.90.060 is the capital-improvements petition.

§ 26.90.030 — Stabilization of rents

The operative prohibition is unchanged and effective January 1, 2027: a landlord may not charge rent for a covered unit exceeding the base rent plus lawful increases, and may not increase rent except as permitted by §§26.90.040–.060. Vacancy decontrol is preserved: on a lawful vacancy, the landlord "may set the initial rent for a new tenancy… subject only to limitations of California statute" (Costa-Hawkins). Subsection D now states the transition rule in percentage terms. If a landlord lawfully raised rent after December 16, 2025 but before January 1, 2027, "the percentage amount of that increase above the base rent will be counted in full" against increases the chapter authorizes, until those increases exceed it. The Program Administrator writes the implementing regulations, with the Board's approval. (In practice the moratorium barred increases for covered units from February 26, 2026, so this mainly reaches increases taken in the intervening window.) The rest is unchanged: one increase per 12 months, a violation occurs on mere delivery of a prohibited increase notice, and every rent-increase or lease notice must disclose the chapter's existence.

§ 26.90.040 — Annual general adjustment (the cap formula)

The formula the council chose 4–3 on April 7 is unchanged: the annual general adjustment (AGA) "will be equal to 60% of annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index or 3%, whichever is less. If the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index is negative, the annual general adjustment will be zero." The Program Administrator must post each year's AGA by October 1, effective January 1 of the following year. The introduced text now states that a landlord must take the AGA "before the end of the calendar year for which the adjustment amount is determined." There is still no banking: an adjustment not taken in its year "may not" be deferred "to a later year or from year-to-year." Increases require at least 30 days' written notice, and no AGA may be applied to a unit out of compliance with state habitability codes or with outstanding ordered repairs. Applied to the April 2026 CPI reading (+3.60% April-over-April, per DIR), the formula yields a first AGA of approximately 2.1%, effective January 1, 2027. The quarter-point rounding sits in the CPI definition, which rounds the CPI change first (2.1%); an alternate reading that rounds after the 60% multiplication gives 2.25%.

§ 26.90.050 — Fair-return petition (MNOI)

The ordinance's escape valve. A landlord may petition the Program Administrator for an upward adjustment. The petition must include an express declaration that each unit has been maintained in compliance with the state habitability statutes (Civil Code §1941.1 et seq.; Health and Safety Code §§17920.3 and 17920.10). Adjustments may be granted "only when the landlord demonstrates by a preponderance of evidence," and the hearing officer or Board "finds based on substantial evidence in the record of a hearing," that they are "necessary to provide the landlord a fair return as required by the California and United States Constitutions."

Two presumptions apply, unchanged: that base-year (2025) net operating income provided a fair return, and that the base rent did when established. The core standard is now phrased as a rebuttable presumption that "maintenance of net operating income equal to the base year net operating income adjusted by the change in the Consumer Price Index from the base year to the current year results in a fair rate of return." The introduced text adds that "nothing in this Section prevents the hearing officer or Rent Stabilization Board from granting or denying a rent increase based upon substantial evidence in the record" — MNOI is the presumption, not the only basis. The presumption can be rebutted: base-year expenses unusually high or low, or base-year income "disproportionately low due to exceptional circumstances." Among the factors, pre-base-year rent patterns are now compared against "market rent for comparable units," and other exceptional circumstances must be established by regulation.

NOI now counts only expenses "directly related or attributable to the property and rental units for which the rent adjustment is sought," with inclusion and exclusion lists in subsection G.

• Gross income counts rent "lawfully collectable at 100% occupancy" plus other occupancy-related income. It excludes sub-metered utilities, cost-pass-through refuse and sewer charges, laundry, storage, and supplementary charges such as "pet rent."
• Operating expenses include reasonable operation, maintenance, and management costs; landlord-paid utilities; base-year and current-year property-tax assessments; legally required license and registration fees; documented landlord-performed labor (capped at 5% of gross income absent a showing of greater services); "reasonable attorneys' fees and costs necessary to the operation of the property for rent," excluding fees on a petition under the chapter; and "up to 50 percent" of the annual registry fee.
• Operating expenses exclude capital improvements (routed to §26.90.060), debt service, late fees, penalties, or interest from paying operating expenses late, penalties for violations, land-lease expenses, political contributions and lobbying payments, depreciation, reimbursed expenses, "unreasonable increases in expenses since the base year," utilities the tenant pays directly, and expenses from unreasonable repair delays.

Averaging or adjusting either year's expenses is now the petitioner's burden to request and prove. Amortized costs earn an interest allowance at the Freddie Mac 30-year PMMS rate plus 2%. The 120-day rule is now conditional: if a decision takes longer than 120 days after acceptance of a complete application, the landlord may recover the increases a timely decision would have allowed, but only if the landlord "did not request, cause, or contribute to the delay." No upward adjustment is available for units out of habitability compliance. The lettering errors we noted in the Public Review Draft (no subsection G; a doubled "h") are fixed.

§ 26.90.060 — Capital-improvements petition

A separate petition lets a landlord pass through the cost of "reasonable capital improvements," but now only after obtaining an approved capital improvement plan under §26.90.100. The closed list of eligible categories is unchanged in substance and is now numbered 1 through 11: new roof; foundation/seismic upgrades; new or substantially new plumbing, electrical, or HVAC systems; exterior painting or siding/stucco; wood-destroying-pest repairs; water-conservation and energy-efficiency installations (the introduced text names solar roof systems and gas-to-electric conversion as examples) and dual-glazed windows; accessibility upgrades; fire sprinkler/alarm systems; stairs and railings; EV charging stations; and lead-paint stabilization and abatement. Improvements ordered to correct habitability or safety violations are ineligible, as are improvements completed before or during the base year, and petitions must be filed within two years of completion. Costs are amortized over the improvement's useful life (with the same PMMS + 2% interest allowance), but the monthly pass-through may not exceed "10% of the current monthly rent or $100 whichever is less" — unchanged. Pass-throughs must be separately itemized and are excluded from future rent-adjustment math; insurance and other reimbursements must be deducted first.

§ 26.90.070 — Tenant petitions for downward adjustment

Tenants may petition for rent reductions on three grounds: (1) failure to maintain the unit in habitable condition, which "constitutes a rent increase"; (2) a reduction, suspension, or termination of a housing service, a decrease in maintenance, or deterioration beyond ordinary wear and tear without a corresponding rent reduction, which "is considered a rent increase"; and (3) rent demanded or retained above the lawful level. Petitions on the first two grounds must specify the conditions and describe how the landlord had notice and an opportunity to correct them. The overcharge remedy is restructured. The hearing officer or Board may order the excess repaid within 30 days or, at the tenant's request, authorize the tenant to withhold a fraction of rent, in a fraction and for a duration the hearing officer or Board sets. If a 30-day repayment order is not honored, the tenant may withhold "in an amount determined by the tenant" until the overcharge is recovered. The petition order remains a defense to an unlawful-detainer action based on that withholding, and a tenant who vacates before full recovery must be paid the balance within two weeks.

§ 26.90.080 — Petition procedures

One procedural track serves all three petition types, and its timelines are unchanged. The Program Administrator must accept or reject a petition within 30 days on completeness only, notify all parties within 14 days of acceptance, and schedule a hearing before "an impartial hearing officer" within 60 days of acceptance, with at least 20 days' notice. Landlord petitioners must be current on program and registry fees, and repeat petitions on substantially the same grounds are barred for 180 days. Hearings are informal: "Formal rules of evidence shall not apply," hearsay is admissible if credible and relevant, and the petitioner bears the burden by a preponderance of the evidence. The introduced text adds that the hearing officer may issue subpoenas and has "no authority to consider the constitutionality of any federal, state or local law or regulation." Parties must be told of their right to appeal to the Board or seek judicial review, and a court reporter is arranged on a party's request rather than for every hearing; all hearings are still recorded. The written decision is due within 30 days of the hearing. Either party may appeal to the Rent Stabilization Board within 30 days. Decisions are not stayed pending appeal, but a reversal requires retroactive true-up payments, and if no board exists, the hearing officer's decision is final, subject to judicial review within 30 days.

§ 26.90.090 — Rent Stabilization Board

A seven-member board appointed by the City Council, of which "at least four members must be tenants of rental housing in the City." The Public Review Draft's designated seats (two tenants, two landlords or property managers, and three at-large members with no financial interest in rental housing) are gone: no seats are reserved for landlords or managers, and no at-large financial-interest restriction is stated. All members must be city residents but "are not required to be qualified electors." Terms are four years, with three initial two-year terms, including two tenant members, and a replacement serves out the term of a removed member.

The council supported a five-member board in July. Staff recommended keeping seven, citing quorum risk, and the recommendation the council approved on September 22 keeps seven. The introduced text adds that the tenant members must include "one tenant member who is 65 years of age or older."

The board's powers are broader than in the Public Review Draft. It meets as set by its own resolution, conducts hearings, and "adopt[s] regulations consistent with this Chapter for implementation and administration of petitions." The Program Administrator's regulations are subject to the board's approval or direction, and the board may recommend changes to the program or the chapter. This goes further than the July 28 straw direction, which limited the board to recommending regulations for council approval. Staff's answers on September 22 were mixed: staff first described a board that recommends appeal-hearing regulations for council approval, then said the Program Administrator will draft regulations for the board to review and adopt. The council did not direct a change, and the introduced text keeps the board-adopts approach. Staff called seating the board "a critical path item" for the January 1 start. Meetings follow the Brown Act, and the board may not form committees. Four members are a quorum, and granting or denying a petition takes four affirmative votes. Appeals are decided on the hearing record unless the board elects a de novo hearing, and board decisions are subject to judicial review within 30 days.

§ 26.90.100 — Capital improvement plans (new)

A new pre-approval step. A landlord needs an approved capital improvement plan before filing a §26.90.060 pass-through petition, and also whenever an improvement will temporarily relocate or evict a tenant, even with no pass-through sought.

• Frequency. One plan application per property or set of units every 24 months, with exceptions for natural disasters, events beyond the landlord's control, and new health-or-safety conditions that led to an order to vacate.
• Tenant notice. Tenants must be told of the application, including whether a temporary interruption of the tenancy or a no-fault just-cause eviction for substantial remodel will be required.
• Short-term relocation. For displacements under 30 days, the landlord pays $150 per household per day for lodging and $30 per occupant per day for meals, adjusted annually by CPI, paid weekly in advance for any extra days. A tenant may instead forgo the payments and owe no rent until moving back in.
• Limits. Major systems may be disrupted without relocation only between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays, and no plan may expose tenants to toxic or hazardous materials such as lead-based paint or asbestos.
• Decisions and appeals. The Program Administrator must act on a complete application within 15 days. Either side may appeal within 15 days, a hearing officer hears the appeal within 30 days and decides within 15, and tenants may raise job, childcare, or other hardship as grounds for relocation or other mitigation.

§ 26.90.110 — Notices (new)

With the lease offer that Municipal Code §26.40.010 already requires, a landlord must give a prospective tenant of a covered unit written notice that the unit is covered, along with current copies of the chapter, its regulations, and any explanatory brochure the City issues. The materials may be delivered by link only with the tenant's written consent to receive them online. Notices must be in English and Spanish, or another language the landlord knows or should know the tenant understands. Landlords must keep proof of compliance and file it with the Program Administrator within three days of a written demand.

§ 26.90.120 — Remedies and enforcement

Violations remain punishable offenses under SBMC Chapter 1.28, and the City Attorney may enforce the chapter "through civil or criminal action," including injunctions, with recovery of costs and fees. The private right of action carries forward: "Any aggrieved person may bring a civil action for damages for any violation," by a preponderance of the evidence. The introduced text removes the Public Review Draft's express statement that no administrative remedy must be exhausted before suing. A landlord's noncompliance "may be asserted as a complete affirmative defense" in an unlawful-detainer action or any other action to recover rent or possession; the defense previously covered possession only. Attempts to recover possession in violation of the chapter expose the landlord to wrongful-eviction damages, with costs and attorneys' fees to the prevailing party, and remedies are expressly non-exclusive.

§ 26.90.130 — Hearing officers

The City Administrator may staff hearings three ways: hiring city-employee hearing officers, contracting with attorneys or retired judges case by case, or contracting with a dispute-resolution firm. The Public Review Draft's standing volunteer panel is removed, which the staff report says eliminates "a no-cost and lower-cost source of hearing officer capacity." Non-employee hearing officers are independent contractors who may provide no other services to the City. As a structural independence guarantee, their "appointment, selection, employment, continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation, and benefits… shall not be directly or indirectly conditioned upon the outcome of hearings."

Chapter 26.100 — Rental registry (new chapter)

The registry now stands on its own as Chapter 26.100 and applies citywide, not only to covered units.

§ 26.100.010 — Registration.

• Who registers. "All residential rental units in the City shall be registered," except units within an owner-occupied dwelling where owner and tenants share a kitchen or bathroom. Exempt units must register too and report their exempt status as a registration field, replacing the Public Review Draft's separate exemption filing.
• Deadlines. Covered units register by the later of April 1, 2027 or 30 days after the registration form is available. All other rental units register by the later of October 1, 2027 or 30 days after. Annual renewals follow procedures the Program Administrator sets.
• Updates. Ownership changes, management changes, and re-rentals after a vacancy each trigger a 30-day amendment.
• What it collects. Per unit: address, bedrooms and bathrooms, landlord and manager contacts, date ownership was assumed, current rent, date and amount of the last increase, the current tenants' move-in date, and exempt status. At the council's direction, the introduced text deletes the tenant-count field. The same edit removed the sentence stating that "personal information regarding any tenant or occupant shall not be required or provided," so the chapter no longer says so expressly; none of the listed fields asks for tenant names. Filings are made under penalty of perjury. Petition and capital-improvement-plan filings still require tenant names and addresses for notice purposes.
• Enforcement, from January 1, 2028. The City may enforce registration. An unregistered landlord may not advertise, demand or accept rent, or evict. No annual adjustment, rent increase, or petition may take effect or be filed without registration, and no no-fault just-cause eviction under Chapter 26.50 may begin.

§ 26.100.020 — Registry fee. The fee has two tiers: a base fee on every rental unit to fund the registry, plus a supplemental amount on units covered by Chapter 26.90 to fund the stabilization program. It is set by council resolution, and fee revenue may be spent only on administering and enforcing the two chapters. The draft states no dollar amount. A fee study is being contracted, and staff told the council on September 22 they aim to bring it back December 15 (video). After timely payment, a landlord may pass through up to 50% of the fee in 12 equal monthly installments, separately itemized and excluded from rent for cap purposes. No pass-through is allowed to tenants of deed-restricted affordable housing, and unpaid pass-throughs cannot be collected from departing tenants. Late filers face charges and penalties set by council resolution, and unpaid fees become a debt to the City.

§ 26.100.030 applies Chapter 26.90's definitions to the registry.

The companion pieces: the moratorium and Chapter 26.50

Two measures already in force sit alongside the draft. Ordinance No. 2026-6206 — the Temporary Rent Increase Moratorium, adopted 4–3 on January 27, 2026, effective February 26, 2026 — freezes rents for covered units at the December 16, 2025 level and expires on the earlier of a permanent program's operative date or December 31, 2026. It is currently being defended in litigation (below). SBMC Chapter 26.50 — Just Cause for Residential Evictions — is the city's existing eviction ordinance (just-cause grounds, notice requirements, relocation-assistance payments for no-fault evictions). Ordinance No. 2026-6207, adopted the same night as the moratorium, added §26.50.100: an owner removing a unit from the rental market must remove all units on the parcel, and the property is barred from residential rental use for five years after removal (the draft's "completed within one year" sentence was deleted at introduction, with staff directed to return with the remaining Ellis Act provisions). On June 9, 2026, the council voted 4–3 to release further Just Cause/Ellis Act amendments for public comment alongside the draft rent stabilization ordinance; on July 28 it directed amendments to Chapter 26.50, which staff says will return "later this Fall" as a separate action.

---

What happens next

The expected path, per the council record and the City Charter:

1. September 22, 2026 — final direction (done). Two 4–3 votes directed the changes summarized above; the ordinance was not introduced that night.
2. September 29, 2026 — introduced (done). The council introduced the redrafted ordinance 4–3 and adopted the $500,000 Measure I start-up resolution.
3. Adoption, expected October 6. An ordinance may not be adopted on the day it is introduced "nor within five days thereafter," only at a regular meeting, and an ordinance altered after introduction may not be finally adopted until at least five days after the alteration (City Charter §511). October 6 is the next regular meeting; the City's calendar lists the October 13 meeting as cancelled. That agenda has not been published. Enactment takes at least four votes.
4. 30 days after adoption — the ordinance takes effect (City Charter §514), about November 5 if it is adopted October 6. A coalition has said it will seek a referendum once the ordinance is adopted; see the open questions below.
5. Before January 1, 2027 — implementation. Staff's list: recruiting and appointing the Rent Stabilization Board; adopting regulations; the fee study and fee schedule (targeted for December 15); building and testing the registry platform; hiring (the program manager position was approved September 15, with two to three positions funded by the start-up appropriation); and the separate Chapter 26.50 amendments.
6. January 1, 2027 — rent limits apply, if the ordinance is in effect. §26.90.030's prohibitions take effect, the first annual general adjustment of approximately 2.1% becomes available with 30 days' written notice, and the moratorium ends.
7. April 1 and October 1, 2027 — registration deadlines, for covered and non-covered units respectively, or 30 days after the registration form is available if later. January 1, 2028 — registry enforcement begins.

If adoption slips past year-end, the moratorium still expires December 31, 2026 by its own sunset — a point Councilmember Jordan and the City Attorney both put on the record September 22 (see the open questions below).

To comment before the adoption vote, see the agenda and eComment links at docs.santabarbaraca.gov and the City's Rent Stabilization Program page.

---

The open questions

• The moratorium is in litigation — and on a clock. The City is defending a lawsuit over the temporary rent-increase moratorium. On April 28, 2026 the council took up — and voted 5–2 to continue — a $400,000 litigation-defense appropriation (described in the record as a $300,000 increase over $100,000 already spent), which returned on the May 12, 2026 consent calendar. On September 22 Councilmember Jordan put the takings clock on the record — "a freeze with no ROI process has a shelf life, and we're at the end of that shelf life" — and the City Attorney said extending the freeze raises legal risk the longer it runs. Staff also described what a referendum would do: a qualified petition suspends the ordinance pending a special election, likely March 2027, at a cost of $300,000–$500,000 or more. The outcome of any of these could affect the moratorium, the base-rent date, or the permanent ordinance's design.
• There is still no fiscal or economic-impact analysis of the policy, and the administration estimate has grown. The record repeatedly notes the absence: the City Administrator conceded on December 16, 2025 that no cost/fiscal analysis existed; the Finance Director listed the program as an unbudgeted "unknown" at the April 21, 2026 budget overview. RSG's May estimate (~$2M/year, ~$154/unit) sized administration only; on September 22 staff said that figure "will increase significantly," put full operation at $2.0–$2.4 million a year and 7–9 positions, and said they would propose a Measure I subsidy in each budget until fees cover costs. Staff reported that after the $500,000 start-up appropriation, adopted September 29, the $400,000 litigation appropriation, and a $500,000 allocation for Casa Cacique, $100,000 would remain in the Measure I Flexible Housing and Homelessness Fund. Staff said fees are expected to cover "most, not all" costs, adding that "no program in the state of California has reached full cost recovery." The lead sponsor asked to bring the fee study back before adoption; the City Administrator answered that there is "absolutely no way" to launch January 1 if adoption waits for it. Mayor Rowse has repeatedly cited Santa Monica's ~$6M/year program as a cost benchmark.
• Adoption, then a possible referendum. The adoption vote is expected October 6. The Help Save Santa Barbara Housing Committee, a coalition seeking to put the ordinance to voters, has said it will gather signatures for a referendum once the ordinance is adopted (Noozhawk, September 24, 2026). The litigation note above records what staff said a qualified petition would do; see also our disclosure. Fee amounts remain unknown until the fee study returns.
• The first-year calendar is tight. The ordinance has the Program Administrator post each year's adjustment by October 1, a date that passes before the ordinance can take effect in early November; the City has not said when it will post the 2027 figure. Petition rulemaking falls to a board that has not been appointed; staff called seating the board "a critical path item."
• Drafting errors remain in the introduced text. The four cross-reference errors in the September 22 draft were not corrected: the definition of "fair return" cites §26.90.060 instead of §26.90.050; §26.90.100(D)(1) points to "Subsection 26.90.130(G)(3)" for relocation payments, which appear in §26.90.100(D)(3); §26.90.100(F) refers to an appeal under "Subsection H," though appeals are in subsection G; and §26.90.080(T) cites "Section 1094.5 of the Civil Code" where §080(O) correctly cites the Code of Civil Procedure. The September 29 text also adds typos: the title reads "Rental Registery," §26.90.015 cites "Section 26,90.010," and §26.90.090 now reads "a replacement appointed to serve" after "will be" was dropped. The Charter does not treat correcting typographical or clerical errors as an alteration that would restart the five-day clock (§511).
• Implementation is unsettled. From the council record: regulatory authority — the introduction draft has the board "adopt" petition regulations and approve the Administrator's, broader than the July 28 direction that the board recommend and the council approve (staff: "shorthand"); the exemptions — the Housing Authority's Section 8 and deed-restricted request, brought back 6–1 on April 7, deferred for analysis July 28, and granted 4–3 on September 22 over the lead sponsor's objection, with her substitute to keep those tenants' access to the rent board failing 4–3; habitability enforcement for exempted units, which staff said it will address "separately"; the fair-return mechanics, which the ordinance's co-sponsor said she had understood "as a formula" until September 22; a flat-3% first year, floated that night and left unresolved; the corporate-owner clause, removed for preemption risk; the definition miscite noted above; and a schedule staff called "very compressed" — board appointments, regulations and the registry platform all still ahead of January 1. Three to four councilmembers will be termed out before the January 2027 launch. See The Council Record for the quotes and votes behind each.

---

Sources

Ordinance and municipal-code text (City of Santa Barbara; full text on file in the project repository)

• City of Santa Barbara, Ordinance amending the Santa Barbara Municipal Code by the addition of Chapter 26.90 (Residential Rent Stabilization) and Chapter 26.100 (Residential Rental Registry), as introduced September 29, 2026, attachment to the Item 2 staff report (PDF, SBRSO copy; City's copy). The primary text for every section summary above.
• City of Santa Barbara, the same ordinance as the "Council Introduction Draft," attachment to the September 22, 2026 Item 12 staff report (PDF; Spanish version) — the prior text.
• City of Santa Barbara, Additional Exemptions to Chapter 26.90 (proposed §26.90.015), Attachment 1 to the September 22, 2026 staff report (PDF) — the source of the §26.90.015 exemptions in the introduced text, without "tourist homes" or student housing.
• City of Santa Barbara, Rent Stabilization Ordinance — Public Review Draft (draft SBMC Chapter 26.90), published June 10, 2026 for the public comment period opened at the June 9, 2026 council meeting (PDF) — the baseline for every "unchanged" and "new" comparison above.
• City of Santa Barbara, Ordinance No. 2026-6206, Temporary Rent Increase Moratorium (adopted January 27, 2026; effective February 26, 2026; base rent as of December 16, 2025; sunset the earlier of a permanent program's operative date or December 31, 2026).
• City of Santa Barbara, Ordinance No. 2026-6207 / SBMC §26.50.100 — Just Cause "Ellis Act" eviction requirements (adopted January 27, 2026), and SBMC Chapter 26.50, Just Cause for Residential Evictions (codified text).
• Charter of the City of Santa Barbara, §511 (Adoption of Ordinances and Resolutions — no adoption on the day of introduction or within five days; five-day wait after any alteration; four votes to enact) and §514 (Ordinances. When Effective. — 30 days after adoption), via the City's Charter & Municipal Code page.

City staff reports, memos, and releases (City of Santa Barbara; via santabarbaraca.gov and the docs.santabarbaraca.gov OnBaseAgendaOnline agenda archive; on file in the project repository)

• Councilmembers Santamaria and Sneddon, council memorandum, Rent Stabilization, September 29, 2025 (with the attached RDN 2025 Rent Survey for the South Coast).
• Council staff presentation, Policy Direction & Work Plan for Development of a Rent Stabilization Program (Item 12), December 16, 2025.
• Council staff report, Update on Development of a Rent Stabilization Program (Item 14), April 7, 2026.
• Council staff report, Additional Research on Rent Stabilization (Item 10), May 19, 2026 — includes the RSG, Inc. program-cost estimate (~$2M/yr; ~$154/unit across ~13,000 covered units).
• Council staff report, Review of Draft Ordinance (Item 14), June 9, 2026.
• Council staff report, Summary of Public Comment and Proposed Amendments to Draft Residential Rent Stabilization Ordinance and Just Cause Ellis Act Amendments Ordinance (Item 23), July 28, 2026 (PDF).
• Council staff report, Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Santa Barbara Municipal Code to Establish Residential Rent Stabilization and Residential Rental Registry Programs (Item 12), September 22, 2026 (PDF) — the Public Review Draft vs. introduction draft comparison, the revised cost estimate, the Measure I request, and the September 15 program-manager approval.
• Council staff report, Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Santa Barbara Municipal Code to Establish Residential Rent Stabilization and Residential Rental Registry Programs (Item 2), September 29, 2026 (PDF) — the four changes from the September 22 draft, and the note that no action was taken on the budget resolution September 22.
• City of Santa Barbara, Resolution amending Resolution No. 2026-057 (FY2027 budget) to approve an allocation of $500,000 in the Measure I Flexible Housing and Homelessness Fund ($45,500 RSG, Inc. amendment; $25,000 fee study with NSB; $429,500 implementation), attached to the September 22 and September 29, 2026 staff reports and adopted September 29, 2026 (PDF).
• City of Santa Barbara press release, Preliminary Policy Discussions Begin on Rent Stabilization, December 18, 2025.
• City of Santa Barbara, Executed Contract No. 30017 — legal-services agreement with Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, PC (May 12, 2026 amendment).

Council meetings (City of Santa Barbara City Council, Regular Meetings; official video; approved minutes on file where published — December 16, 2025 and January 13/27 and March 17, 2026; later tallies transcribed from the meeting audio)

• December 16, 2025 (Item 12 — policy direction): youtube.com/watch?v=UyOUAB3PZUE
• January 13, 2026 (Item 14 — moratorium introduction; urgency version failed): youtube.com/watch?v=7OMw43rEPbc
• January 27, 2026 (Item 2 — adoption of Ordinance Nos. 2026-6206 and 2026-6207): youtube.com/watch?v=O-dtRagm8cE
• March 17, 2026 (Item 3 — RSG, Inc. agreement): youtube.com/watch?v=g1EHoy-T__A
• April 7, 2026 (Item 14 — final policy direction; the 60%-of-CPI / 3% cap vote): youtube.com/watch?v=33OWM8XMR2s
• April 21, 2026 (FY2027 budget overview; program cited as a budget "unknown"): youtube.com/watch?v=Ifyk0Gx_G8Q
• April 28, 2026 (Item 5 — litigation-defense appropriation, continued 5–2): youtube.com/watch?v=yOU99hvNGNw
• May 12, 2026 (Consent Item 6 — litigation-services agreement; Item 11 — mid-cycle budget): youtube.com/watch?v=UKGI2DEnBl0
• May 19, 2026 (Item 10 — supplemental research; RSG cost estimate): youtube.com/watch?v=6Tc4fEYHXmY
• June 9, 2026 (Item 14 — draft-ordinance review; comment period opened): youtube.com/watch?v=UqTaTlW6SRg
• July 28, 2026 (Item 23 — public-comment summary and amendment direction by straw vote): youtube.com/watch?v=LLIZJ7qAuW4
• September 22, 2026 (Item 12 — introduction draft; final direction by two 4–3 votes; ordinance not introduced): youtube.com/watch?v=JiracqW0dMM — minutes not yet posted as of September 29; votes and procedural statements transcribed from the official video at 5:14:02, 5:20:31, 5:23:21, 5:24:19, 5:25:00, and 5:25:24.
• September 29, 2026 (Item 2, moved from consent to the end of the agenda — ordinance introduced 4–3; Measure I resolution adopted 4–3): youtube.com/watch?v=-KXmENwGpIk — minutes not yet posted; votes transcribed from the official video at 0:03:26, 4:31:36, 4:32:23, and 4:33:32.

Other

• California Department of Industrial Relations, California Consumer Price Index (CPI-U, All Items) — the index named by §26.90.020; April 2026 reading (+3.60% April-over-April) drives the first AGA estimate.
• Santa Barbara Association of REALTORS, letter to the City Council opposing the moratorium and Ellis Act just-cause amendments, January 13, 2026 (on file in the project repository).
• KEYT News Channel 3-12, "Santa Barbara City Council voted 4-3 on Rent Stabilization Ordinance and Registry," September 29, 2026 (link) — same-day coverage, including its read of public comment.
• Noozhawk, "New Coalition Wants Voters to Decide on City Rent Control Law," September 24, 2026 (link) — the planned referendum.

SBRSO — Santa Barbara Rent Stabilization Observatory. Every claim above traces to a document or meeting listed here; see also Sources and The Council Record.