The California Apartment Association packed San Diego City Council chambers with rental housing providers Tuesday, many wearing green “Ethical Housing Provider” stickers, as the council considered a proposal to regulate the applicant screening process, fees for late rent, and fees owners charge residents for certain services and amenities. No vote was taken but a final ordinance is expected to come before the city council in the fall.

The proposal, the latest anti-housing proposal authored by San Diego Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera, would cap fees for items such as parking, pets and trash collection at 5% of monthly rent regardless of actual cost, limit late fees to 2% of rent with a mandatory seven-day grace period, and prohibit fees for pest control, valet trash and pet ownership outright. It would also require housing providers to accept tenant-provided screening reports, cap holding deposits at 5% of rent, and add new disclosure requirements for advertising and rental documents.

In the weeks leading up to the hearing, CAA spearheaded a robust advocacy campaign calling on housing providers to educate policymakers and demonstrate the real-world impacts of the proposal. CAA built a coalition of more than 10 business and housing organizations, mobilized hundreds of members to contact the council, and generated thousands of letters from concerned housing providers and local residents in opposition. The association’s perspective was covered through an opinion piece in the San Diego Union-Tribune and a television news segment on CBS 8.

The coordinated effort had an impact on the council discussion. Although the hearing was informational, several council members raised significant concerns. Councilmember Raul Campillo objected to the proposal’s use of government-imposed price controls, and Councilmember Stephen Whitburn said the measure could reduce transparency for renters by folding fees into base rents. The discussion made clear there is no consensus on many of the proposal’s core provisions; the only issue that appeared to receive broad support was some form of upfront disclosure to renters about possible fees they could pay as part of their tenancy.

CAA opposes the fee and screening proposal, arguing it would increase operational costs and legal risk for housing providers while conflicting with the city’s stated goal of increasing the supply of homes that are affordable and available to residents of all income levels.

“There is no evidence that the proposed policy solutions will achieve any specific goals or solve any identified and quantified problem,” said Melanie Woods, vice president of local public affairs for the association.

The association has also argued San Diego should wait for related state legislative discussions on rental fees and screening before adopting a local ordinance.

The proposal remains before the council and is likely to return in September.