California Apartment Association

The California Apartment Association wishes to thank the lawmakers who voted down a bill that would have unfairly penalized landlords who make honest calculations regarding security deposits.

Thanks also go out to the rental-housing professionals who took part in CAA’s letter-writing campaign to defeat the bill.

On May 29, Senator Mark Leno’s SB 603 received 18 no votes, 13 yes votes, and 8 abstentions. The bill needed 21 yes votes to pass.

The no votes came from the following senators: Joel Anderson, R-San Diego; Tom Berryhill, R-Twain Harte; Ron Calderon, D-Montebello; Anthony Cannella, R-Ceres; Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana; Bill Emmerson, R-Redlands; Jean Fuller, R-Bakersfield; Ted Gaines, R-Rocklin; Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo; Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar; Steve Knight, R-Antelope Valley; Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber; Richard D. Roth, D- Riverside; Norma J. Torres, D-Pomona; Mimi Walters, R-Irvine; Roderick D. Wright, D-South Los Angeles; Mark Wyland, R-Escondido; and Leland Y. Yee, D-San Francisco/San Mateo.

After the bill’s failure, Tenants Together, which sponsored the legislation, sent out a newsletter with the subject line “California legislators betray tenants.” Moreover, the group ran this column on BeyondChron.org, urging his members to express their “sense of outrage” to the senators who voted against SB 603. The column says these lawmakers “need to get an earful” upon returning to their districts.

The way CAA sees it, if these senators get an earful, it should be brimming with gratitude. Their no votes prevented legislation that — even after substantial amendments — remained bad for the rental housing industry.

Before the changes, the bill would have required that landlords pay interest on security deposits, a mathematically faulty provision that Leno removed after CAA waged a strong lobbying effort – and more than 800 CAA members wrote opposition letters to lawmakers.

Despite removal of the interest provisions, issues with SB 603?s penalty provisions kept the bill unpalatable for the rental housing industry.

As it came before the Senate Floor, the bill would have required a small-claims court judge to award penalties against an owner if a tenant successfully demonstrated that he or she did not receive all — or a portion of — his or her security deposit, regardless of the landlord’s reasoning for withholding it. The bill removed a judge’s discretion, which exists under current law today.

At the same time, the bill would have mandated high penalties for any security deposit error, even a minor mistake, such as with calculating deductions. All mistakes would be treated as if committed in bad faith.

Again, thanks go to the senators who voted against SB 603 and the members of the apartment industry who helped them see its flaws.