City Council Special Meeting

CITY OF ALISO VIEJO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING April 8, 2020, 6: 00 P. M. Council Chambers, City Hall, 12 Journey Aliso Viejo, California City Council conducted this meeting in accordance with California Governor Newsom' s Executive Orders N-25- 20 and N-29- 20 and COVID-19 pandemic protocols. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Munzing called the Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo to order at 6. 00 p. m. ROLL CALL: PRESENT. MAYOR MIKE MUNZING ( via teleconference) MAYOR PRO TEM TIFFANY ACKLEY ( via teleconference) COUNCILMEMBER ROSS CHUN ( via teleconference) COUNCILMEMBER DAVID C. HARRINGTON ( via teleconference) COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAM A PHILLIPS ( via teleconference) ABSENT NONE STAFF PRESENT: DAVID A. DOYLE, CITY MANAGER SCOTTC. SMITH, CITY ATTORNEY MITZI ORTIZ, CITY CLERK OMAR DADABHOY, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ISAAC AZIZ, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER LT CHAD KAJFASZ, CHIEF OF POLICE SERVICES SARAH LIMONES, SENIOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM COORDINATOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Community Development Director Omar Dadabhoy led the pledge of allegiance. 1. DISCUSSION: 1. 1. RESOLUTION SUPPLEMENTING THE CITY COUNCIL' S PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING NOVEL CORONAVIRUS ( COVID- 19) City Manager David Doyle introduced City Attorney Scott Smith, who provided an overview Community Development Director Omar Dadabhoy and Lt. Chad Kajfasz provided additional information Staff responded to questions regarding requests from businesses, procedure, safety concerns and law enforcement. Councilmembers Page 1 of 2 April 8, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes

commented on the matter. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2020-08 supplementing Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus ( COVID- 19) Motion: Councilmember Harrington moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded to approve the recommended action. Motion carried unanimously. 1 2 REPORT ON POSSIBILITY OF LOCAL EVICTION MORATORIUM DUE TO NOVEL CORONAVIRUS ( COVID- 19) CRISIS City Manager David Doyle introduced City Attorney Scott Smith, who provided an overview. Mayor Munzing opened for public comment. City Clerk Mitzi Ortiz read the following electronic communication into the record: 1 Christy Cornwall urged approval of a city- wide eviction moratorium There were no other comments. Staff responded to questions regarding clarification of state actions. Councilmembers commented on the matter. No further action was taken. 2. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Munzing adjourned the meeting at 6: 53 p. m. to the regularly scheduled meeting of April 15, 2020. Respectfully submitted: Approved by: MITI ORT , MMC MI KE'iMUNZING CITY CLE K MAYOR Page 2 of 2 April 8, 2020 Special Meeting Minutes

1 AGENDA ALISO VIEJO CITY COUNCIL WEDNESDAY, APRIL 08, 2020 6:00 PM SPECIAL MEETING City Hall Council Chambers 12 Journey Aliso Viejo, CA Mayor Mike Munzing Mayor Pro Tem Tiffany Ackley Councilmember Ross Chun Councilmember David C. Harrington Councilmember William A. Phillips SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19 On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which allows Council Members to attend City Council meetings telephonically. Please be advised that some, or all, of the Aliso Viejo City Council Members may attend this meeting telephonically. Members of the public may view the meeting live on Cox Communications Channel 851, AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 or online at www.avcity.org. Comments and questions can be submitted in writing for City Council consideration via email to Community-Input@avcity.org. Comments must be received prior to consideration of the subject agenda item. It is the City’s intention to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you need special assistance to participate in the meeting, the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and/or accommodations. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II] Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (949) 425-2505 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Supplemental documents relating to specific agenda items, including communications received after agenda delivery, are presented at the time of the meeting. Supplemental documents are also available for review by request. For more information, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (949) 425-2505.

2 PLEASE SILENCE ALL CELL PHONES AND OTHER ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT WHILE CITY COUNCIL IS IN SESSION CALL TO ORDER: CONVENE SPECIAL MEETING ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. DISCUSSION: 1.1. RESOLUTION SUPPLEMENTING THE CITY COUNCIL’S PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution supplementing Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Staff Report Attachment 1 - Resolution 1.2. REPORT ON POSSIBILITY OF LOCAL EVICTION MORATORIUM DUE TO NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) CRISIS Recommended Action: Receive and file the report requested by the City Council. Staff Report Attachment 1 - Memo Supplemental Staff Report 2. ADJOURNMENT: The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is April 15, 2020.

1 AGENDA ALISO VIEJO CITY COUNCIL WEDNESDAY, APRIL 08, 2020 6:00 PM SPECIAL MEETING City Hall Council Chambers 12 Journey Aliso Viejo, CA Mayor Mike Munzing Mayor Pro Tem Tiffany Ackley Councilmember Ross Chun Councilmember David C. Harrington Councilmember William A. Phillips SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING COVID-19 On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which allows Council Members to attend City Council meetings telephonically. Please be advised that some, or all, of the Aliso Viejo City Council Members may attend this meeting telephonically. Members of the public may view the meeting live on Cox Communications Channel 851, AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 or online at www.avcity.org. Comments and questions can be submitted in writing for City Council consideration via email to Community-Input@avcity.org. Comments must be received prior to consideration of the subject agenda item. It is the City’s intention to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you need special assistance to participate in the meeting, the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and/or accommodations. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II] Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (949) 425-2505 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Supplemental documents relating to specific agenda items, including communications received after agenda delivery, are presented at the time of the meeting. Supplemental documents are also available for review by request. For more information, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (949) 425-2505. 1

2 PLEASE SILENCE ALL CELL PHONES AND OTHER ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT WHILE CITY COUNCIL IS IN SESSION CALL TO ORDER: CONVENE SPECIAL MEETING ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 1. DISCUSSION: 1.1. RESOLUTION SUPPLEMENTING THE CITY COUNCIL’S PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) Recommended Action: Adopt a resolution supplementing Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Staff Report Attachment 1 - Resolution 1.2. REPORT ON POSSIBILITY OF LOCAL EVICTION MORATORIUM DUE TO NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) CRISIS Recommended Action: Receive and file the report requested by the City Council. Staff Report Attachment 1 - Memo Supplemental Staff Report 2. ADJOURNMENT: The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is April 15, 2020. 2

City of Aliso Viejo AGENDA ITEM DATE: April 8, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION SUPPLEMENTING THE CITY COUNCIL’S PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) Recommended Action(s): Adopt a resolution supplementing Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. Background: On March 18, 2020, as empowered by California Government Code section 8630 and Aliso Viejo Municipal Code 2.40.060, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and ratifying the Director of Emergency Services’ March 16 proclamation of local emergency. Discussion: This resolution supplements the City Council’s proclamation of local emergency. First, this resolution extends for 120 days any City-issued building or planning permit set to expire during this local emergency or for which a request for extension was filed before the emergency declaration occurred. The local emergency began on March 16, 2020, when initially proclaimed by the Director of Emergency Services. The local emergency ends when terminated by the City Council. Second, this resolution allows local Type 41 and Type 47 liquor license holders to take advantage of the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control’s March 19, 2020 “Notice of Regulatory Relief.” Under the Notice, Type 47 (on-sale general – eating place) license 3

Page 2 of 2 holders may sell beer, wine, and distilled spirits for consumption off the premises and Type 41 (on-sale beer and wine – eating place) license holders may sell beer and wine, but not distilled spirits, for consumption off the premises. This brings the City’s alcoholic beverages regulations into conformity with ABC action intended to accommodate takeout food services during the COVID-19 emergency. Environmental: There is no environmental impact related to this item. Attachment(s): 1. Resolution 4

Page 1 of 3 60367.01100\32839484.2 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO, CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENTING ITS PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) WHEREAS, on March 18, 2020, as empowered by California Government Code section 8630 and Aliso Viejo Municipal Code 2.40.060, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-05 proclaiming a local emergency regarding novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and ratifying the Director of Emergency Services’ March 16 proclamation of local emergency; and WHEREAS, the imminent and proximate threat of introduction of COVID-19 in the City of Aliso Viejo continues to threaten the safety and health of City residents; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes, with this resolution, to supplement its proclamation to further address the local emergency; and WHEREAS, this resolution will further assist in a coordinated public health response to reduce transmission and illness severity, provide assistance to health care providers, coordinate and mitigate public services that may be disrupted from this emergency, and mitigate any other effects of this emergency on the citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, a declaration of a local emergency will assist in a coordinated public health response to reduce transmission and illness severity, provide assistance to health care providers, coordinate and mitigate public services that may be disrupted from this emergency, and mitigate any other effects of this emergency on the citizens of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALISO VIEJO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to California Government Code section 8630 and Aliso Viejo Municipal Code Section 2.40.060 the City Council hereby reiterates its finding and proclamation of a local emergency caused by conditions or threatened conditions of COVID-19 pandemic in Aliso Viejo, which constitutes an extreme peril of health and safety of persons within the territorial limits of the City. Section 2. The local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until its termination is proclaimed by the City Council. Section 3. Any City-issued building permit, planning permit, or other entitlement that would have otherwise expired (1) during the pendency of this local emergency or (2) for which an application for extension was filed prior to this local emergency (i.e., prior to March 16, 2020) is hereby extended for 120 days. 5

Page 2 of 3 60367.01100\32839484.2 Section 4. Per the California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control’s (ABC) March 19, 2020 “Notice of Regulatory Relief,” Type 47 (on-sale general – eating place) license holders may sell beer, wine, and distilled spirits for consumption off the premises and Type 41 (on-sale beer and wine – eating place) license holders may sell beer and wine, but not distilled spirits, for consumption off the premises. For the duration of the local emergency, the City requirements and conditions to the contrary of ABC’s Notice of Regulatory relief in this respect are waived. Section 5. During the existence of said local emergency, the powers, functions, and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by state law, ordinances, and resolutions of the City of Aliso Viejo. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of _________, 2020. __________________________ Mike Munzing Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: __________________________ __________________________ Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Mitzi Ortiz, MMC, City Clerk 6

Page 3 of 3 60367.01100\32839484.2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ALISO VIEJO ) I, MITZI ORTIZ, City Clerk of the City of Aliso Viejo, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2020-__ duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aliso Viejo at their regular meeting held on the ___ day of _______, 2020, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ___________________________ MITZI ORTIZ, MMC CITY CLERK (SEAL) 7

City of Aliso Viejo AGENDA ITEM DATE: April 8, 2020 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Scott C. Smith, City Attorney Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: REPORT ON POSSIBILITY OF LOCAL EVICTION MORATORIUM DUE TO NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) CRISIS Recommended Action(s): Receive and file the report requested by the City Council. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. Background: At its last City Council meeting, the City Council requested that we prepare and deliver a white paper discussing the possibility of adopting a local moratorium on foreclosures as authorized by the Governor’s order. The Governor recently issued a state-wide moratorium on residential evictions. A discussion of this is attached. Attachment(s): 1. Memorandum. 8

60367.00100\32824776.4 Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Manager From: City Attorney Date: April 5, 2020 Re: City Eviction Moratorium Confidential: Attorney-Client Communication I. Introduction On March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom proclaimed a California State of Emergency as a result of the COVID-19 (novel coronavirus) threat. Governor Newsom has since issued numerous Executive Orders on education funding, tax deadlines, unemployment and disability benefits, relaxation of open meeting laws (e.g., the Brown Act), and regulations to protect renters and homeowners.1 This memorandum focuses on Executive Orders N-28-20 and N-37-20, both of which contain regulations aimed at protecting California’s housing stability during the COVID-19 crises. Executive Order N-28-20 among other things, removes preemptive State hurdles to local regulation of residential and commercial evictions and of foreclosures. Executive Order N-37-20, issued 11 days after Executive Order N-28-20, establishes a temporary statewide moratorium on evicting residential tenants impacted by COVID-19. The following analysis discusses the scope of both orders, the City’s implementation options, liability considerations surrounding the enactment of local eviction and/or foreclosure restrictions, and recommended next steps for the City. II. Executive Orders N-28-20 and N-37-20 A. Executive Order N-28-20 The Governor issued Executive Order N-28-20 (“Order 28-20”) on March 16, 2020. 2 The purpose of Order 28-20 is to ease the economic impacts of COVID-19, which the Order states “…have been significant, and could threaten to undermine Californians’ housing security and the stability of California businesses.” (Order 28-20, at p. 1.) Order 28-20 explains that many Californians have experienced substantial losses of income as a result of business closures, which consequently hinders residents’ ability to keep up with their rents, mortgages, and utility bills. (Id.) To fend off the potential for increased rates of homelessness during this crisis, the 1 Governor Newsom’s Executive Orders issued to date are available online at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/category/executive-orders/ 2 A copy of Order 28-20 is available online at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.16.20- Executive-Order.pdf. 9

- 2 - 60367.00100\32824776.4 Order proclaims that “…California must take measures to preserve and increase housing security for Californians to protect public health.” (Id.) To that end, Order 28-20 authorizes local governments to adopt regulations imposing moratoriums on residential and commercial evictions and slowing the process of foreclosures. Paragraph 2 of Order 28-20 provides that Civil Code sections 1940 et seq. and 1954.25 et seq.,3 along with any other “provision of state law that would preempt or otherwise restrict a local government’s exercise of its police power to impose substantive limitations on residential or commercial evictions” are “suspended to the extent that [they] would preempt or otherwise restrict such exercise.” (Order 28-20, at p. 2.) As alluded to in the Order, state law generally preempts (i.e., prevents) cities from imposing substantive limitations on residential and/or commercial evictions and foreclosures. The Order changes this landscape by expressly authorizing cities to adopt local restrictions “based on their particular needs.” (Id., at pgs. 1-2.) The scope of this window for local regulation is narrow, as it is limited to instances where both of the following conditions are met: i. “The basis for the eviction is nonpayment of rent, or a foreclosure, arising out of a substantial decrease in household or business income (including, but not limited to, a substantial decrease in household income caused by layoffs or a reduction in the number of compensable hours of work, or a substantial decrease in business income caused by a reduction in opening hours or consumer demand) or substantial out-of- pocket medical expenses”; and ii. “The decrease in household or business income or the out-of-pocket medical expenses described in subparagraph (i) [above] was caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, or by any local, state, or federal government response to COVID-19, and is documented.” (Emphasis added.) In instances where a city imposes such restrictions, paragraph 2 further provides that the statutory cause of action for judicial foreclosure and unlawful detainer 4 or “any other statutory cause of action that could be used to evict or otherwise eject a residential or commercial tenant or occupant of residential real property after foreclosure is suspended.” (Order 28-20, at p. 2 [emphasis added].) The suspension of judicial foreclosure and/or unlawful detainer remedies applies only “… to any tenancy, or residential real property and any occupant thereof to which a local government has imposed a limitation on eviction… and only to the extent of the limitation imposed by the local government.” (Order 28-20, at p. 2.) Read together, paragraph 2 of Order 28-20 authorizes cities to adopt regulations imposing limitations on residential and commercial evictions and/or foreclosures in certain COVID-19 related circumstances. When a city opts to exercise this authority, the remedies of judicial foreclosure and/or unlawful detainer are suspended (i.e., unavailable to the landlord/property 3 Civil Code sections 1940 et seq. and 1954.25 et seq. restrict cities’ ability to impose substantive limitations on residential and commercial evictions, respectively. 4 The statutory causes of action for judicial foreclosure and unlawful detainer are provided in Civil Code sections 725a et seq. and 1161 et seq., respectively. 10

- 3 - 60367.00100\32824776.4 owner) but only to the extent of a city’s regulations. Meaning, for example, that if a city chose to adopt a temporary moratorium on evictions for only residential tenants, then the remedy of unlawful detainer would be unavailable to landlords for residential tenancies within the City for the duration of the City’s moratorium. Under this scenario, by regulating only residential tenancies, commercial tenants and commercial and residential mortgagors would still be subject to unlawful detainer and/or foreclosure proceedings if they fell behind on their rent or mortgage payments. Notably, nothing in Order 28-20 relieves a tenant of the obligation to pay rent or otherwise restricts a landlord’s ability to recover rent due. (Order 28-20, at p. 2.) This means that any eviction moratorium adopted by the City does not act as a rent waiver or rent forgiveness. Upon expiration of the moratorium period, and any grace period provided thereafter (e.g., 90 – 120 days), tenants must repay their landlord the rent due to date under their lease. If a tenant fails to repay their landlord after the expiration of the moratorium and grace periods, landlords can then impose late fees and initiate eviction proceedings. Lastly, cities’ authority to impose restrictions as discussed herein is temporary and expires on May 31, 2020 (unless extended by the Governor). (Id.) Accordingly, any moratorium adopted by the City must be limited in duration by providing for a date of expiration. B. Executive Order N-37-20 The Governor issued Executive Order N-37-20 (“Order 37-20”) on March 27, 2020. 5 Order 37-20’s press release provides that this order “builds on” Governor Newsom’s “previous executive order [Order 28-20] authorizing local governments to halt evictions for renters” impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Unlike Order 28-20, Order 37-20’s protections go into effect immediately and are not reliant on any action by local governments. In relevant part, Order 37-20: 1. Extends the deadline specified in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1167 6 by 60 days for any tenant who is served, while Order 37-20 is in effect, with a complaint that seeks to evict the tenant from a residence or dwelling unit for nonpayment of rent and who satisfies the following requirements: a) Prior to March 27, 2020, the tenant paid rent due to the landlord pursuant to an agreement; b) The tenant notifies the landlord in writing before the rent is due or “within a reasonable period of time afterwards not to exceed 7 days” that the tenant needs to delay all or some payment of rent because of an inability to pay the full amount due to COVID-19 reasons that include, but are not limited to the following: 5 A copy of Order 37-20 is available at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/3.27.20-EO-N-37-20- text.pdf 6 Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1167, tenants in unlawful detainer, forcible-detainer, and forcible-entry actions must file an answer to the landlord’s complaint within five (5) days after service of the summons and complaint on the tenant. Order 37-20 extends this deadline from five (5) days to sixty (60) days. 11

- 4 - 60367.00100\32824776.4 i. The tenant was unavailable to work because the tenant was sick with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 or caring for a household or family member who was sick with a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19; ii. The tenant experienced a lay-off, loss of hours, or other income reduction resulting from COVID-19, the state or emergency, or related government response; or iii. The tenant needed to miss work to care for a child whose school was closed in response to COVID-19. c) Tenants must retain “verifiable documentation” such as “notices, payroll checks, pay stubs, bank statements, medical bills, or signed letters or statements from an employer or supervisor explaining the tenant’s changed financial circumstances” in support of the tenant’s assertion of an inability to pay. This documentation may be provided to the landlord no later than the time upon payment of back-due-rent. 2. While this new order is in effect, no writ may be enforced to evict a tenant from a residence or dwelling unit for nonpayment of rent if that tenant satisfied the requirements of paragraph (1)(a)-(c) above. As in Order 28-20, the protections in paragraphs (1) and (2) above are in effect through May 31, 2020. Nothing in Order 37-20 prevents a tenant who is able to pay all or some of the rent due from paying that rent in a timely manner or otherwise relieves a tenant of liability for unpaid rent. III. Implementation of the Orders and the City’s Options. A. Implementation Options. In the 11 days between when Order 28-20 and Order 37-20 were issued, cities throughout California adopted local regulations (under authority granted by Order 28-20) limiting evictions and/or foreclosures. These local regulations were most commonly enacted via urgency ordinances under Government Code section 36937. Urgency ordinances are available when the Council finds that adoption of the ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, and protection of life and property within the City. An urgency ordinance differs from a standard ordinance in that an urgency ordinance goes into effect immediately. Recall, standard ordinances require a first and second reading and go into effect 30 days after adoption at the second reading. In addition to making the required urgency findings, an urgency ordinance requires an affirmative vote from 4/5ths (four-fifths) of the City Council. (Gov. Code, § 36937 (b).) Unlike Order 28-20, Order 37-20’s protections are available to covered tenants immediately, without any required action on behalf of local governments. Accordingly, as 12

- 5 - 60367.00100\32824776.4 described in the following section, whether the City should adopt its own regulations depends on scope of tenancies and/or mortgages the City wishes to regulate. B. Scope of City’s Options. Order 28-20 is written expansively as it authorizes cities to temporarily enact substantive regulations limiting evictions and foreclosures for residential and commercial properties. Predictably, cities have used a variety of means to implement Order 28-20’s grant of authority. For example, the City of Santa Ana enacted regulations imposing a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions that apply to both commercial and residential properties. 7 Alternatively, the City of Santa Monica’s moratorium prohibits evictions (but not foreclosures) and applies to both commercial and residential tenancies.8 The City of Sacramento, on the other hand, embraced a more limited approach by adopting a moratorium on evictions in only residential tenancies.9 Foreclosures Order 37-20 does not address and/or impact Order 28-20’s grant of authority to local governments to adopt foreclosure restrictions. That said, adopting regulations governing foreclosures is not without risk to the City. Although Order 28-20 removes State preemption in the area of foreclosures, it does not address preemptive federal banking and other foreclosure laws, which provide no clear berth for local regulation in this area. Notably, Order 28-20 itself already expressly requests financial institutions holding residential or commercial mortgages to self-impose a moratorium on COVID-19 related foreclosures and evictions (Order 28-20, at p. 3, ¶ 5), and the federal government has already adopted protections for federally-backed mortgages. Mortgages and foreclosures are subject to comprehensive state and federal regulation. (See e.g., 12 C.F.R., § 1024.41 (g) [prohibitions on certain judicial and non-judicial foreclosure sales upon borrower’s timely submittal of a complete loss mitigation application]; see also American Financial Services v. City of Oakland (2005) 34 Cal.4th 1239 [City of Oakland’s predatory mortgage lending ordinance invalidated as preempted by comprehensive state statutory framework governing the same].) Given this precedent, notwithstanding Order 28-20’s withdrawal of State preemption, wading into this area of law raises serious preemption concerns for municipalities. Given federal preemption concerns and Order 28-20’s explicit request for lenders to implement moratoriums on commercial and residential foreclosures, caution would suggest that the City not enact any additional limitations on foreclosures at this time. Evictions In the wake of Order 37-20, the City no longer needs to take any affirmative action (e.g., adopt its own regulations) in order to protect residential tenants impacted by COVID-19. Order 37-20’s protections are currently in effect, prohibit the eviction of residential tenants impacted by 7 A copy of Santa Ana’s moratorium is available at: https://www.