Los Angeles County Extends Its Eviction Moratorium Again, Citing Rising COVID, Flu, RSV Cases
Landlords say that nearly three years of eviction moratoriums is forcing some property owners out of the rental business entirely.

One of the country's longest-running eviction bans will last a little longer. Last week, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a one-month extension of its eviction moratorium, citing rising cases of COVID, flu, and other respiratory illnesses.
A motion approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors last week prohibits the eviction of lower-income delinquent tenants who claim a COVID-19-related financial hardship through the end of January 2023. Renters also can't be removed for causing nuisances or having unauthorized pets and occupants.
The same motion asks county staff to study the feasibility of extending the moratorium through the end of June 2023, or over three years after the original May 31, 2020 expiration date for the county's eviction ban.
"The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated our housing crisis, and experts fear an 'eviction tsunami' is on the horizon if we don't take bold, swift action," said Los Angeles County Supervisor Hilda Solis on Twitter last week, shortly before the board approved the one-month extension. "Our families need eviction protections for at least an additional 6 months."
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated our housing crisis, and experts fear an 'eviction tsunami' is on the horizon if we don't take bold, swift action. At no time, especially during a pandemic, should families be forced out of their homes and communities.
— Hilda Solis (@HildaSolis) December 20, 2022
Landlords say the county's decision imperils their businesses in the name of responding to an emergency that's long since passed.
"We just don't know where it's going to end at this point," says Daniel Yukelson, the executive director of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA). "It's been a severe financial strain that's been put on the backs of what are mostly independent, small rental property owners that have had to deal with COVID in their own families."
AAGLA is currently suing the county over its eviction moratorium in federal court. In October, they won a small reprieve when a U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted a preliminary injunction against enforcing parts of the county's moratorium.
The court found that the county's ban on landlords serving tenants with eviction notices unless the landlord reasonably believed that a tenant's self-certified claims of COVID financial hardship were false violated property owners' due process rights.
In response to that ruling, the county in November updated its moratorium to remove tenants' ability to self-certify they'd suffered COVID-related hardship and more clearly define what counts as a COVID-related hardship.
That policy was supposed to sunset at the end of the year. The board of supervisors says the extension through the end of January is necessary given the "respiratory illness trifecta" of COVID, flu, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cases.
The city of Los Angeles' eviction moratorium—which AAGLA is also challenging in court—is set to expire at the end of January as well.
The federal government, almost all states, and many local governments adopted moratoriums on removing tenants for nonpayment of rent early in the pandemic. Moratorium supporters argued that the policies were necessary to preserve unemployed tenants' ability to abide by the lockdown orders that had also cost them a job and the ability to pay rent.
The lockdowns eventually ended, vaccines became universally available, and people went back to work. Nevertheless, moratoriums persisted, now justified by the need to give more time for federally funded rental aid to reach tenants who'd accumulated huge rental debts while eviction bans were in place. Tenant advocates claimed that ending moratoriums before then would cause an "eviction tsunami."
Federal rental assistance has now largely been spent, a federal eviction moratorium was struck down by the Supreme Court, and that eviction tsunami never quite materialized. A general, belated return to normality has seen almost all remaining state and local eviction bans end.
But Los Angeles officials have proven more resistant to letting their moratorium lapse. Politically, an eviction ban is a hard policy to walk away from.
Warnings of an eviction "tsunami" during the pandemic were always overblown. Landlords benefitted little from going through the costs of an eviction and turning over a unit just to be stuck with a vacancy in a depressed rental market.
The combination of a hot post-pandemic rental market and some tenants' accrual of massive unpayable rental debt during the near-three-year moratorium means landlords have much more incentive to pursue evictions.
So, Los Angeles officials warning that evictions will increase markedly if the county moratorium ends aren't exactly unfounded. Continually extending it is just delaying an inevitable result at this point, while further financially imperiling landlords currently stuck delinquent tenants.
To help small landlords weather the financial effects of the moratorium, the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors is also considering the creation of a $5 million relief program.
Yukelson says that money would be a drop in the bucket compared to billions in unpaid rent the moratorium has foisted on landlords. He says the financial strain of the moratorium is forcing some AAGLA members and their properties out of the rental market entirely.
"These small owners aren't going to be willing to stay in the business," he says.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They are really digging themselves a hole here, do they think that given another 6 months tenants will come up with 3 years of back rent?
No, they think they can keep extending the eviction moratorium indefinitely.
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
They probably don't expect them all to be the whole 3 years behind. They figure many are just a little behind and could reasonably make it up.
Cite?
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
https://WWW.WORKSCLICK.COM
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
https://WWW.WORKSCLICK.COM
Cases will always go up and down and up again. Seems like an excuse to extend it forever.
This is an illegal taking of private property.
You have it wrong. This is a justified taking of illegal private property. For equity.
Equity? Did someone say "equity"?
i sold my rental properties because of this nonsense. apparently government will now void legal contracts between consenting parties. not interested in assuming that risk.
I’ve never understood why politicians single out landlords to play the government’s role in helping people who (allegedly) can’t make ends meet. They don’t make grocery stores or restaurants pay for food for the poor. They don’t force private schools to pay for students.
Dude, didn't you learn economics based on Snidely Whiplash?
Maoist playbook.
I’ve never understood why politicians single out landlords to play the government’s role in helping people who (allegedly) can’t make ends meet.
Marxists don't need a reason to hate kulaks. Plus the irony of the people trying to re-institutionalize the feudal system calling people who purchase and rent out property 'landlords' is delicious.
Just wait... That's the next step.
Submitted for Reason's biggest stories of 2023. Too local?
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2022-12-22/three-events-connect-dots-if-you-dare
Things are hurtling down the drain of tyranny in Canada where the government is looking to pass Bill C36 in British Columbia.
This bill “redefines” what informed consent is and provides power to the government to force medicate citizens for any illness while allowing the censorship of anyone that dissents, and, get this — to seize their property and imprison them.
While this is taking place the The College of Physicians and Surgeons in Ontario sent out a memo to all doctors in Ontario suggesting that patients who aren’t jabbed should be considered as folks with a mental-illness and put on psychiatric medication…
Disagreeing with the government’s medical procedures will be deemed a sign of mental illness and the government can “act accordingly.”
I’m not making this isht up.
But wait, that’s not the most insane part. The state has said that some of the details of this bill will “remain undisclosed until the bill has passed.”
Here’s my question. If they are prepared to divulge the details discussed without hiding it, pray tell, what they are unprepared to mention?
Holy shit! To review. They have told us they can seize your property, imprison you if you don’t get their “medication,” and if you dissent, you can be labelled mentally ill and drugged.
No, I’m not kidding. It’s right there in the bill.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/insider-weekly-261-12-4.jpeg?itok=1oy95mJP
OK looks like that's probably fake. Apologies.
Not certain anything is fake anymore. More like a trial balloon.
to seize their property and imprison them.
You mean quarantine camps - sarcasmic.
It’s for their own good.
Dear Reason Editors
Could you please add moderation to the comments section and ban several of the regular commentators. I would like to contribute to the discussion, but I cannot stomach the abusive midwits that currently dominate the comments section. I am sure I am not the only one who feels this way.
Thanks
Ben
Libertarians for censorship!
Maybe the "mute" button will eventually work again. If not, scroll faster and ignore.
Poor baby.
I want his list of banned commenters. I'm sure it will be telling.
Dear Reason Editors
I find “midwit” to be an extremely offensive slur. Please ban BenF so I can feel safe posting comments here again.
Thanks
you're confused. that is a feature, not a bug. the best thing about the reason comments is the fact that they're NOT moderated. no censorship here as far as i know. you don't understand that free speech is always speech that some don't like. so stop being such a pussy and learn how to scroll past the comments you don't like.
So, how does this end? LA County will never do it via the legislative process - there's no incentive to do so.
Does it have any hope of being found illegal? The "emergency" justifying it is long over. When does this become an illegal taking?
"When does this become an illegal taking?"
Everyone would be wise to pay attention to the lefts entire narrative; Sell your souls to the [WE] foundation; because YOU don't own you; [WE] own you!....
And within that premise; there is no such thing as an illegal taking. All theft is made legal for the [WE] foundation.
I see little reason to expect state courts to stop this and the SCOTUS has been depressingly unwilling to address this.
"When does this become an illegal taking?"
California courts have ruled that such moratoriums aren't a "taking" because each order is temporary and has an expiration date. Conceivably it could go on for decades as long as it was a series of "temporary" orders.
I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com
“They’ll pry Covid from our cold, dead fingers”
- CA Democrats
This is a perfect example of how democrats are squarely opposed to freedom.
This is taking a manufactured, histrionic crisis, and using it to shit on private property rights. Why not just have the government control housing if they have this illegal, unconstitutional power at their disposal.
But hey, if they can increase state power, shit on private property rights, and stick it to the kulaks all at once, you can bet these commies (read: democrats) will do it
When I think about the trouble of being a landlord in NY, I remind myself that it could be worse; I could be a landlord in LA.
Well they just elected a Communist as mayor (if she hadn't been a Communist, she would have been Biden's VP, remember?), so the war on landlords and private property and free commerce and independent thought continues in LA.
more unconstitutional government intrusion. things like rent control and eviction moratoriums are all illegal. someone needs to challenge this bs in court.
And you thought this was about science.
Have you paid your fucking rent?
I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM