Land use committee advances Ellis Act relocation payments and Cesar Chavez Street renaming

The Land Use and Transportation Committee voted 3-0 on November 9 to send the full Board of Supervisors a proposal that would raise the relocation payments landlords owe tenants displaced under the Ellis Act, the state law that lets an owner take rental units off the market.

The committee also advanced a contested resolution to rename Cesar Chavez Street as Las Campesinas Street, over objections from residents and business owners who asked for a delay and questioned the name itself.

Both items left the committee as committee reports, which sends them to the full board with the committee's recommendation. The clerk said items acted on are expected to appear on the Board of Supervisors agenda on November 17, 2026.

Relocation payments are the city's answer to a displacement it cannot block. Under the Ellis Act, an owner who withdraws units from the rental market must pay each displaced tenant, with a cap on what is owed per household and a supplement for tenants who are elderly or disabled. The amounts sit in the Administrative Code, which is why raising them takes an ordinance.

The ordinance before the committee amends that code to raise the payments. The Mayor's Office presented the case for the increase, arguing that the amounts now in the code, set from a study of moving costs, no longer cover what displaced tenants actually pay.

Officials described the gaps between the payment and the real cost of moving. The payment does not account for rental application fees, which tenants pay while competing for a new unit. It does not account for the gap between leases, when a household pays for temporary housing before a new lease begins. And it has not been adjusted for inflation since the study that produced it.

Officials also pointed to a rental vacancy rate they said has fallen and to an uptick in eviction filings, telling the committee that tenants displaced now have a harder time finding another unit than when the amounts were set.

The ordinance would raise three figures in the code: the payment made for each tenant, the cap on what a landlord owes per household, and the supplemental amount paid when a tenant is elderly or disabled.

Public comment on the ordinance was brief. Two speakers supported the increase and told the committee it was too small, arguing that even the higher amounts would fall short of what displaced tenants face. A third speaker urged the city to publish data on what happens to tenants after they are displaced.

No one spoke against the ordinance, and the committee voted 3-0 to send it to the full board with a positive recommendation as a committee report. If the board adopts it, the higher amounts would apply to tenants displaced by Ellis Act evictions, replacing figures that have not changed since the city's earlier study.

The renaming drew the meeting's longest public comment and the sharpest disagreement. The resolution of intention would change the name of Cesar Chavez Street to Las Campesinas Street, a change the agenda describes as honoring women leaders in the labor movement.

A working group that promoted the renaming presented the proposal to the committee, describing the new name as a way to honor women farmworkers and survivors of sexual abuse. Supporters who spoke during public comment repeated that framing, saying the women the name would recognize had gone unrecognized on the city's streets.

Residents and business owners asked the committee to delay the decision. Several criticized the outreach process, telling the committee it had not reached the people who live and work along the street. Others raised objections to the name itself: its length, how it would be pronounced, and whether it was practical for a street of its size and for businesses that carry the address.

Supporters and opponents disagreed on more than the words. Supporters treated the change as a matter of recognition for labor history and for women in it. Opponents treated it as a decision made without the people most affected by it, and asked for time to make their case.

The committee did not wait. It recommended the resolution to the full Board of Supervisors with a positive recommendation as a committee report, and the motion carried on a three-aye vote. The resolution now goes to the full board, and the street name does not change until the board acts.

Both items are expected on the board's agenda on November 17, 2026.